Observing from a distance: with electricity bills based purely on kilowatt hours used, the power companies lose money on net metering, because the marginal rate is way too high. Having a fixed hookup charge plus a lower rate for kilowatt hour used more accurately reflects costs to the utility.
Keeping the power lines hooked up to a home which is just powering a night light while the owners are on vacation is just as expensive to the power company keeping the power lines hooked up to a home which is running the air conditioner with the windows open. The fuel used in powering that air conditioning is much closer to the industrial marginal cost of electricity, not typical residential rates.
With net metering, you get a bunch of homes like the nightlight home on the grid.
On the other hand, breaking out the hookup charge from the energy use charge lowers the marginal cost of electricity. Crank up that AC. Sunk cost, baby!
----
With all this written, I did not see any changes in marginal rates in your text above, but I did not read all that carefully. I don't live in California, so I'm too lazy to read the legaleze.
Well, there should be if you are going to have net metering.
The old way does encourage conservation more.
Then again, the old way penalizes those who living in apartments unless they get commercial rates. Getting electricity to apartments should be easier than to houses.
Cost based electricity pricing would be progressive in areas where the poor live in apartments. But it would hit those poor living in small houses and mobile homes.
Great job showing how the sausage is made in California.
To recap:
- Assembly members initially passed an 18-word long bill by a large majority. The actual text was filled later on. This is a mockery of what everyone understands by “legislative process.”
- Many of those Assembly members are hypocrites: once everyone understood what the bill is really about, they repudiated it even though they signed it.
- Charging more for consumption based on income just sounds unfair. We already have progressive income taxes.
"The reality is that they did know, or at least should have. It was not hidden in the fine print. It was the second bullet point of their own legislative analysis."
As a former legislative aide in Michigan, this was the point I kept looking for as I read this. Not just the lawmakers, but the media had no excuse for missing this. Gaming the price paid for the same critical service by different consumers is basic recipe bad economics.
"The reality is that they did know, or at least should have. It was not hidden in the fine print. It was the second bullet point of their own legislative analysis."
As a former legislative aide in Michigan, this was the point I kept looking for as I read this. Not just the lawmakers, but the media had no excuse for missing this. Gaming the price paid for the same critical service by different consumers is basic recipe bad economics.
Excellent! I had no idea of how this sausage factory worked.
Company’s earn money by making something and selling it at a profit. Utilities earn money by making something and kissing ass. Stephen Powell is the best ass kisser I have ever seen. He knows who and where and how. Utilities will say and do anything to preserve their authorized rate of return.
My rich lawyer friend who had his solar subsidy snatched away and is now getting his rates increased because he is rich feels betrayed! 😂. The people he has religiously voted for his whole life are now coming after him.
Great piece and you were right. Makes me mad. 😡 Just another example of how corrupt things have gotten in Sacramento.
Observing from a distance: with electricity bills based purely on kilowatt hours used, the power companies lose money on net metering, because the marginal rate is way too high. Having a fixed hookup charge plus a lower rate for kilowatt hour used more accurately reflects costs to the utility.
Keeping the power lines hooked up to a home which is just powering a night light while the owners are on vacation is just as expensive to the power company keeping the power lines hooked up to a home which is running the air conditioner with the windows open. The fuel used in powering that air conditioning is much closer to the industrial marginal cost of electricity, not typical residential rates.
With net metering, you get a bunch of homes like the nightlight home on the grid.
On the other hand, breaking out the hookup charge from the energy use charge lowers the marginal cost of electricity. Crank up that AC. Sunk cost, baby!
----
With all this written, I did not see any changes in marginal rates in your text above, but I did not read all that carefully. I don't live in California, so I'm too lazy to read the legaleze.
Agree. There should be a grid component of rates to cover fixed costs
Well, there should be if you are going to have net metering.
The old way does encourage conservation more.
Then again, the old way penalizes those who living in apartments unless they get commercial rates. Getting electricity to apartments should be easier than to houses.
Cost based electricity pricing would be progressive in areas where the poor live in apartments. But it would hit those poor living in small houses and mobile homes.
Great job showing how the sausage is made in California.
To recap:
- Assembly members initially passed an 18-word long bill by a large majority. The actual text was filled later on. This is a mockery of what everyone understands by “legislative process.”
- Many of those Assembly members are hypocrites: once everyone understood what the bill is really about, they repudiated it even though they signed it.
- Charging more for consumption based on income just sounds unfair. We already have progressive income taxes.
"The reality is that they did know, or at least should have. It was not hidden in the fine print. It was the second bullet point of their own legislative analysis."
As a former legislative aide in Michigan, this was the point I kept looking for as I read this. Not just the lawmakers, but the media had no excuse for missing this. Gaming the price paid for the same critical service by different consumers is basic recipe bad economics.
Yep, it was right here all along.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB205#
"Jet powered cars can treat a stop sign like it was not there"
There ought to be a law......
California gets what they deserve and asked for - they voted governor goofball into office and the ratified that when the recall failed.
"The reality is that they did know, or at least should have. It was not hidden in the fine print. It was the second bullet point of their own legislative analysis."
As a former legislative aide in Michigan, this was the point I kept looking for as I read this. Not just the lawmakers, but the media had no excuse for missing this. Gaming the price paid for the same critical service by different consumers is basic recipe bad economics.
Excellent! I had no idea of how this sausage factory worked.
Company’s earn money by making something and selling it at a profit. Utilities earn money by making something and kissing ass. Stephen Powell is the best ass kisser I have ever seen. He knows who and where and how. Utilities will say and do anything to preserve their authorized rate of return.
My rich lawyer friend who had his solar subsidy snatched away and is now getting his rates increased because he is rich feels betrayed! 😂. The people he has religiously voted for his whole life are now coming after him.
Huh?
Where are you pulling the $24 per month figure?
What am I misunderstanding?