Power Utilities and the Democratic Process
I’m aware that the vast majority of those reading this do not live in the state of California, USA – and thus have no reason to want to understand “Proposition 16” as it exists on our June ballot. Why then would I burden readers with something that does not directly affect them? Because it illustrates exactly how power utilities can abuse the democratic process, and use huge sums of money (derived, of course, from the consumers themselves) along with deliberately misleading advertising to wrangle positions of even greater monopoly — while thwarting the adoption of renewables.
Pacific Gas and Electric is the sole sponsor of Prop 16. The measure exists on the ballot solely because PG&E spent $35 million getting it there. And the reason for the proposition is singular: if passed, the bill would further strengthen the stanglehold PG&E has over its customers, by changing the State Constitution to require a two-thirds majority from any community wishing to look elsewhere for electric power — making that possibility practically impossible to achieve. As PG&E CEO Peter A. Darbee proudly told investors on a recent conference call, Prop 16 would discourage communities within its massive jurisdiction from any attempt to buy power from a competitor – this is the one and only consequence of the referendum.
Outside of the media purchased with PG&E’s money, Prop 16 has been roundly jeered – largely for the sheer brazenness of the attempt to buy a constitutional amendment with only real beneficiary: PG&E itself.
According to a white paper from UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment:
An independent analysis of Proposition 16 finds that it would protect the monopoly status of investor-owned energy utilities and block the development of publicly owned electric power companies, if passed by California voters. At the same time, the initiative could conceivably slow the development of renewable energy.
I also have to say that this is the wrong state to try something like this. The proposition is broadly opposed by every group associated not only with environmentalism and sustainability – but also with basic fairness and belief in the democratic process. I’ll be very surprised if their $35 million buys PG&E anything more than the public loathing it so richly deserves.
Craig,
We have to face the fact that some companies, like some politicians, think the public in general is ignorant. I believe more people today than ever before are paying attention to what’s happening in the government/big business realm. I look forward to the day when the afore mentioned entities wake up to the fact that what they do is being watched.
Although I live far far away in a state with many Utilities operated by Public owned thru stock by investors, my own community generates its power iiiiin a municipal power plant. and the city commissioners make power plant management decisions. and the utility does not try raising its rates fearing the viters who pay the utility bills for electricity. Still some would complain that electric profits are city income and hold property taxes down…
Proposition 16 is so OUTRAGEOUS that you-all in California MUST defeat it !
A grass roots effort should be raised as “Backlash” that Corporations cannot propose State Constitutional Amendments, and limiting their political donations in State election actions as they are limited in Federal election politics to a few thousand dollars (Minimize the Power of “Big Money’ and give political power back to the people!)
Defeat Proposition 16 !
The United States Political system is supposed to be:
“One man (Person) gets one vote, NOT one DOLLAR gets one vote…
For those that haven’t seen the TV spot that’s been running, it pretty much goes the distance in terms of egregious misinformation. For myself, it has been a surprise that PG&E has such an extreme agenda. From other conferences I have been in, this amendment would purportedly impact any community attempting to do a utility scale renewable (> 1Mw). I can’t rationalize the downside risk they are assuming. It seems like there should be some better reasoning than thus far aired in the media. Are they that truly stupid?
Thanks, Arlene. I haven’t seen the ad (as I watch almost zero commercial TV). I’m sure it’s completely nauseating.
Defeat “Proposition 16” FIRST !
Defeat “Proposition 16” FIRST !
Defeat “Proposition 16” FIRST !
Defeat “Proposition 16” FIRST !
Defeat “Proposition 16” FIRST !
Now, STOP developing the huge wind and solar and nuclear plants that perpetuate the utility companies. We need two person family scale electric plants. a electric power source to just supply our daily energy, a storage unit to keep lights, air-cond. and heat on all the time, modern efficient appliances, and the key item, all you smart individuals in California can invent, design, and build is a combined generating plant and storage to level out the load daily. WITHOUT a UTILITY CONNECTION !!
In the mid 1920’s my great uncle had a farm power plant. No wires reached from town. he had a 36 volt storage battery bank. and a “Delco Plant,” a small motor running on lamp oil that recharged the battery bank daily in two hours. The system worked fine. and it would work today with the addition of an “Inverter” to produce power our modern appliances can use. But we don’t need to run on lamp oil, unless it is available for free, there are a lot of alternatives, like” a natural gas well”, Geothermal power for a large building or two with one drilled well… alternatively for a community of 5,000 people. Other alternatives might be a fuel cell plant on methane from sewage and garbage and lawn clipping in a big tank as a generator of the methane, or from small shallow wells in old land fills, (Now being vented to the atmosphere…) There are a lot of other alternatives.
Do not clear 3 square miles of forest, install a huge solar array, and sell the electricity to the nearby residents. That is profitable but WRONG. instead install solar panels above the homeowners roofs to let them be power independent and let them pay for it with a reasonable payment that is less than they paid the utility and stop after 10 years because it is paid for.
Or install a small wind generator or two if the weather is favorable and pay them off in a short time too. (Make a “Reasonable Profit on annual maintenance.”
There are ALTERNATIVES, lets create some that do not include the “Obscene Scale” of Current Electric Utilities.
Hey California–you’ve got some great wind resources right offshore. Circuit beakers are required, blowout preventers are not. Sell the power to PG&E or direct to community power cooperatives.
Craig, I’m a fairly new reader who hasn’t had time yet to respond to your posts or delve deeper into the topics that are interesting to me. That said, I am in California (specifically, central CA) and I couldn’t agree more with your post. Prop. 16 would be more aptly named the “PG&E Perpetual Preservation Act”.
Thanks for writing — and glad you agree — not everyone does! 🙂 Hope you find other interesting stuff here; please feel free to comment on anything on which you have a heartfelt viewpoint.
PG&E would benefit much more by dividing the $35 million spent on prop 16 and simply returning it to us. It would be a great goodwill gesture. I also see where PG&E is proposing that ratepayers in the cooler coastal areas that don’t use air conditioning pay $100 dollars a year extra to help subsidize the cost of air conditioning for those living in the warmer central valley. It’s ideas like this is why we need to be able to opt out of PG&E.
This problem is, I am afraid, a global one and not only confined to California or the US. Also we electricity consumers within the EU in general and Sweden in particular are hard hit by so called “harmonization” , that is that all electrical power is billed the price of the most expensive producer. This means that for example the abundant and cheap norwegian and swedish hydroelectic power is “supercharged” to the price of electricity from old coal- or oilfired powerplants plus, of course, a host of different taxes including “environmental”.
Thanks, Sivert. In fact, this was the reason I wrote the post. I presumed — and I can see that I was at least in some measure correct — that folks in other regions of the country/world were experiencing similar difficulties.
I’m sick of power companies pretending to have the interest of the custumers at heart when in reality they have only self-serving interests. The grid is in decay and all Americans need to conserve power usage called negawatts.(negitive use of energy). I like what Dennis Miles said and he’s right. Only imagination holds us back from innovation. Every house or building should make its own power and consume its own waste. We already have the technology but the power companies aren’t looking at the obvious solutions, cause that doesn’t make profit.
Charles DeMo Sustainable Building Advisor
c