SDGE new rate plan filling shows the true nature of the rigged game

[CharlieEscCA]

Referencing the new rate filing (a March 2018 bill insert) https://www.sdge.com/sites/default/f...esForecast.pdf one can see how fubar'd the current rate situation in the SDGE territory.

The filing says:

In 2019, SDGE overall electric sales are expected to decline by 5.4% when compared to currently adopted electric sales. Due to the decline in electric sales, SDGE is requesting to increase rates to recover the designated revenue requirement.

Here's the new rate proposal



So, the bottom line is there revenues are declining by 5.4% -- likely because of individuals and companies fleeing to solar because of the crazy rates -- so the answer is to raise the crazy rates even higher.

This combined with my previous post today -- get out of this state if you can! I unfortunately can't as my wife is not on-board with any move.

Another rainy day in paradise ...

[DanS26]

Any other normal business faced with a revenue decline would look to cut costs first to maintain profitability. But utilities are a different animal......their knee jerk reaction is to raise rates and most of the time they get away with it.

IMO it won't be long before net metering will be on the block.

[J.P.M.]

Any other normal business faced with a revenue decline would look to cut costs first to maintain profitability. But utilities are a different animal......their knee jerk reaction is to raise rates and most of the time they get away with it.

IMO it won't be long before net metering will be on the block.

I don't know if I'd call it a knee jerk as much as the easiest way out.

But in the vein of a business, and maybe looking at it from the other side of the table and running a household somewhat like a business in terms of expenses and a budget, one tool to keep expenses in line is to use less electricity, but that seems to be something most every homeowner isn't aware of.

Been my experience to usually find most folks are quicker to bitch & moan about the situation rather than being pragmatically and intelligently proactive about doing something about it - part of which might include getting informed about electricity rates and see what gaming of the system is possible, and also letting politicians know of their displeasure.

Just my $0.02.

[reader2580]

Using less electricity with an investor owned utility doesn't lower the bill in many cases. The utility will go to the state and say they aren't getting their guaranteed rate of return due to lower sales so they need to increase rates. The person who cut electricity use to save money is now paying the same as before.

I bought my house as a foreclosure in 2014 and renovated it completely due to neglect. I did everything possible to lower utility costs including full LED lighting, spray foam in attic, and new central air conditioning. My electricity usage is about 1/3 of the area average. (It helps that I live alone.)

[J.P.M.]

Using less electricity with an investor owned utility doesn't lower the bill in many cases. The utility will go to the state and say they aren't getting their guaranteed rate of return due to lower sales so they need to increase rates. The person who cut electricity use to save money is now paying the same as before.

I bought my house as a foreclosure in 2014 and renovated it completely due to neglect. I did everything possible to lower utility costs including full LED lighting, spray foam in attic, and new central air conditioning. My electricity usage is about 1/3 of the area average. (It helps that I live alone.)

I didn't see simply turning stuff off or not using it in the first place among your list of doing everything possible to lower utility costs.

That the POCO wants to maximize profit is as natural as users desire to not pay for the product provided. Users can effect the most immediate and most cost effective bill reduction by simply reducing their use. Beyond what's probably some baseline that will vary with the POCO, use less and you will be billed less. Fact of life.

My electrical usage is ~ 40% of others in my HOA of ~ 650 homes (~ 6,800 kWh/yr. vs. ~ 17,000 kWh/yr average), despite having a home that's older than most and ~ 1/3 larger than the average. My electric bills are several thousand $$/yr. less than most of my neighbors. So what ? No one cares but me. I certainly don't suffer because of it. It comes down to a matter of attitude and using one's head.

Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

[reader2580]

I didn't see simply turning stuff off or not using it in the first place among your list of doing everything possible to lower utility costs.

That the POCO wants to maximize profit is as natural as users desire to not pay for the product provided. Users can effect the most immediate and most cost effective bill reduction by simply reducing their use. Beyond what's probably some baseline that will vary with the POCO, use less and you will be billed less. Fact of life.

My electrical usage is about 4,750 KWh per year. I am consistently at about 35% of the average usage for the neighborhood as shown on my bills. There isn't much more I can do to reduce electrical usage and still maintain a modern lifestyle. I don't want to live like a hermit to save a few bucks on electricity. I did change my air conditioner settings last summer to reduce electric usage. My budget bill for electricity actually went down from $66 a month $62 while rates went up.

Public electric companies don't have to worry about cost cutting since they get a guaranteed rate of return.

[J.P.M.]

My electrical usage is about 4,750 KWh per year. I am consistently at about 35% of the average usage for the neighborhood as shown on my bills. There isn't much more I can do to reduce electrical usage and still maintain a modern lifestyle. I don't want to live like a hermit to save a few bucks on electricity. I did change my air conditioner settings last summer to reduce electric usage. My budget bill for electricity actually went down from $66 a month $62 while rates went up.

Public electric companies don't have to worry about cost cutting since they get a guaranteed rate of return.

I used about that much back in the northeast and lived more than comfortably. If you can get a better deal than from your POCO, take it. There's always off grid living as well, although some folks wouldn't call it living as much as surviving, but opinions vary.

[CharlieEscCA]

We all know there is a CA "tax", i.e. higher costs. Typically, this is 20% to 40%. But with SDGE rates, it's 100% to 300%.

And does anyone else believe that SDGE cost to generate electricity is twice as much in summer than in winter? Or that the TOU differences between peak and semi peak should be as wide as it is? The cost spreads are so wildly different and beyond either buying or generating power for summer vs winter or peak vs semi peak.

If rates were not so out of line, residential solar wouldn't have taken off like it did.

[J.P.M.]

We all know there is a CA "tax", i.e. higher costs. Typically, this is 20% to 40%. But with SDGE rates, it's 100% to 300%.

And does anyone else believe that SDGE cost to generate electricity is twice as much in summer than in winter? Or that the TOU differences between peak and semi peak should be as wide as it is? The cost spreads are so wildly different and beyond either buying or generating power for summer vs winter or peak vs semi peak.

If rates were not so out of line, residential solar wouldn't have taken off like it did.

SDG & E does not generate any electricity. They buy all of it from suppliers and resell it. The selling price to end users is only loosely linked to what SDG & E pays for it. The price is what the market will bear. The system is what it is. Don't expect fairness.

Residential solar took off because of net metering. High prices were here before PV.

The single most cost effective method and path to low(er) electric bills is to use less. Do that and your bills will be lower. The way things are now with a lot of residential energy use is somewhat analogous to folks who drive Hummers 20,000 miles/yr. with one person in the vehicle and then bitch about the price of fuel. Do as you wish, just be aware of the consequences.

[Steve C]

Just out of curiosity, how do SDGE rates compare to PG&E rates?

[BFW577]

Just curious is that 27.6 cent a kwh the total cost including delivery charges? Or is that just the wholesale power portion of it? Here in CT we are charged like .10 a kwh for the power portion but when factoring in all the other delivery charges, service fees etc is like .30 kwh.

[J.P.M.]

Just out of curiosity, how do SDGE rates compare to PG&E rates?

Overall and as a somewhat simplistic but short answer, they are probably somewhat comparable.

They seem to be somewhat comparable depending on the schedule, a bit more so perhaps for tiered rates. Both of those POCO's and others in CA for that matter are pushing residential cust. toward T.O.U. rates, of which PG & E seems to have more choices, making the situation even more confusing. Hard to make comparisons, particularly with T.O.U. rates unless comparing a specific use pattern, probably in 15 minute increments over 8,760 hrs. in a year which use pattern will itself vary from user to user, and then only with a thorough knowledge of how to construct a bill from published rates and policy. The task is not beyond most folks ability to get that information and understand it, but it does take persistence and patience.

In general, rate review and understanding that can make for better decision making is very difficult for most users unless they dig into the rate schedules and particular POCO policies. That's a PITA and made worse by most every POCO's lack of clarity and paucity of information and help.

[J.P.M.]

Just curious is that 27.6 cent a kwh the total cost including delivery charges? Or is that just the wholesale power portion of it? Here in CT we are charged like .10 a kwh for the power portion but when factoring in all the other delivery charges, service fees etc is like .30 kwh.

Short answer to your question is probably and almost certainly maybe, but not for all time, users and situation.

There is usually a charge for the electricity itself, a charge for getting it to the end use, and various other, usually somewhat smaller charges, including some taxes that will vary by POCO, locality, time of use, time of year and other variables. Some credits may also come in to play.

Commonly, the more you use, the more some or all of those components increase which increases the per kWh rate. That makes the overall situation close to impossible to understand without a deep dive into utility regulation and policy.

For most anyone in CA to say they pay a fixed rate is probably not an accurate statement. They may accurately state that their average rate per billing period was based on what they paid divided by what they used and come up with a number, but that's not much use in trying to figure out how to pay less per kWh, or why that $ amount per kWh is what it is.

It's easy and therefore tempting to want to simplify a convoluted and complex situation, but it doesn't clarify things much or provide much help in understanding the situation as a step to lower bills.

It does seem to help with the moaning.

[Charlie W]

It stands to reason that rates per kWh might rise if consumption falls. The cost of operating the grid is fixed and not dependent in a linear function on how much power it transmits. I used to live in Seattle, and some years back the city appealed for a 20% across the board reduction in water use. People beat the target, and lo and behind the city's water rates per gallon skyrocketed. The pipes and pumps still have to be paid for.

[bcroe]

It stands to reason that rates per kWh might rise if consumption falls. The cost of operating the grid is fixed and not dependent in a linear function on how much power it transmits. I used to live in Seattle, and some years back the city appealed for a 20% across the board reduction in water use. People beat the target, and lo and behind the city's water rates per gallon skyrocketed. The pipes and pumps still have to be paid for.

Maybe for short term, but eventually the plant will need to keep up with demand. Population is
NOT decreasing, demand increase will come sooner or later. Bruce Roe