SF CHRONICLE: Why California’s plan to let PG&E charge you a fixed monthly fee is as flawed as it sounds

By Chronicle Editorial Board

In June 2022, with little debate or opportunity for public input, California lawmakers approved and Gov. Gavin Newsom signed AB205, a sprawling, 21,000-word bill focused on energy policy. AB205 was a so-called “trailer bill,” a piece of legislation nominally attached to the state budget that’s often used to sneakily pass sweeping policies without going through the traditional legislative and public review process. 

Even lawmakers didn’t appear to fully realize what was in AB205 because once the California Public Utilities Commission began following through with what the bill directed it to do — establish a fixed monthly charge, dependent on household income, for all Pacific Gas & Electric, San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison customers — hell broke loose.

LA TIMES: Anger builds over sweeping change in the way most Californians will pay for electricity

By: Melody Petersen

With little debate two years ago, state lawmakers passed a complex energy bill that enabled a sweeping change in how most Californians are billed for electricity. The legislation was what Pacific Gas & Electric had asked for from the state public utilities commission three months before: a transformation of electric rates so that households would pay a fixed charge each month in exchange for lower rates for each kilowatt hour they used. Gov. Gavin Newsom submitted the bill as part of a massive 2022 budget revision. In four days, it was passed out of an Assembly committee hearing without discussion, approved by the full Assembly and Senate and signed by Newsom. The state’s three largest investor-owned power companies that pushed for the change say it will encourage Californians to ditch cars and appliances that run on planet-warming fossil fuels and replace them with vehicles, stoves and heaters that operate on electricity from solar panels and wind turbines. They also say the new monthly fee will allow them to more evenly allocate fixed costs among customers. But opponents say the legislation was a financial gift to PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric, and will cause millions of Californians who live in small homes or apartments that use little electricity to pay more, while residents in large homes that use a lot of electricity will save money.

WATCH: MeritPlus interviews Bernadette Del Chiaro

Watch CALSSA’s Bernadette Del Chiaro discuss misconceptions about solar supply and demand, and explain why California needs more solar, not less, to keep the lights on and fight climate change with MeritPlus.com’s Kris Gutierrez. 

CANARY MEDIA: California’s rooftop solar policies threaten progress on climate

NEM 3.0 rules have undermined California’s rooftop solar industry and could hamper the state’s efforts to meet its climate targets.

By Julian Spector

When California undercut its own rooftop solar market one year ago, it surrendered a crucial tool for achieving its ambitious climate goals.

For the last two decades, California set the national standard for clean energy policy. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, jumpstarted the rooftop solar industry in 2006 with his Million Solar Roofs initiative, and championed binding carbon-reduction goals with AB32, which guides the state to this day. Successor Jerry Brown, a Democrat, signed into law a deadline to switch to a zero-carbon electricity system by 2045. Now the state is working to cut the fossil fuels it relies on for nearly 40 percent of its electricity, especially when the nation’s largest solar fleet goes to sleep for the night.