References

Tips

Writer Bio

Skimming my news feeds in the post-Finovate logjam, I flagged a news release about a new app that just landed in the Android Market (the iPhone version rolled out last December). The app allows Californians to easily pay their PG&E power bills from their mobile phone using a credit/debit card or checking/savings account. It’s powered by Tio Networks. 

And while you’d think that three years into mobile app era, there’d be hundreds, if not thousands of similar apps, a quick search of the Apple App Store came up empty (see note 1). 

The app is drop-dead simple to use, as it should be (see screenshots below). The amount owed (across multiple PG&E accounts if necessary) is shown. Then, users select payment method, "sign" the screen with their finger, and submit. An email confirms the transaction.

TIO levies a $1.45 transaction fee per payment (well disclosed, see second screenshot below), which is a buck more than a stamp, but it also gives customers the option of paying by card, something that can’t be done in the mail, online or in person. And payments received by 5pm are posted the same day, an important benefit for the large segment of the population that prefers to pay bills at the last minute.

Summary: Company specific same-day billpay apps are a great convenience for the majority of customers who pay their bill upon receipt (rather than relying on automated options). We expect to see many more like this. FIs and payment processors that serve billers would be wise to help them mobilize their payments.

——————————————–

PG&E mobile billpay screenshots (iPhone version)

——–

Notes:
1. There are likely at least a few others that I didn’t find. The app search tools are not super sophisticated.
2. As of 7 July 2011, there are more than 425,000 available apps and more than 15 billion cumulative downloads.

PG&E announced it had voluntarily implemented a moratorium on service disconnections for non-payment. This suspension will apply to both residential and commercial customers and will remain in effect until further notice.

PG&E has outlined a series of billing and service modifications to support customers who have been impacted by the virus. However, customers must self-certify that they are experiencing economic hardship due to the COVID-19 so their accounts can be flagged. Customers please call 1-800-743-5000. If you register, customers will be able to receive the following:
-PG&E is offering flexible payment plans.
-PG&E is waiving re-connection fees and return check fees.
-PG&E is waiving new security deposits for up to one year.

All PG&E customer service centers were closed as of Tuesday, March 17th in accordance with social distancing measures. Customers who typically pay their bills at one of these centers can:
-Call 1-877-704-8470
-Mail payments to PG&E, P.O. Box 997300, Sacramento, CA 95899
-Go to pge.com to learn how to pay online or to find nearby Neighborhood Payment Centers

SAN RAMON, Calif. -- Pacific Gas & Electric's household customers will be hit with an average rate increase of 8% to help the once-bankrupt utility pay for improvements designed to reduce the risks that its outdated equipment will ignite deadly wildfires in its Northern California service territory.

The higher prices, approved Thursday, take effect March 1 and are expected to boost the bills of PG&E's residential customers by an average of $13.44 a month. That may further strain the budgets of people struggling to make ends meet during a recession caused by the pandemic that is causing governments to curtail commerce and corral people at home in an effort to ease the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

California power regulators approved the increase after two years of wrangling between PG&E and a variety of groups battling to limit how much of the financial burden customers should have to shoulder for the utility's long-running neglect of a grid that supplies power to about 16 million people in a sprawling area.

PG&E's outdated equipment was blamed for causing a series of wildfires during 2017 and 2018 that killed more than 120 people and destroyed more than 27,000 homes and other buildings. The damage caused PG&E to file for bankruptcy in 2019, opening a legal avenue for the company to negotiate $25.5 billion in settlements with wildfire victims and others.

The San Francisco utility emerged from bankruptcy five months ago and is now seeking to upgrade its equipment and adopt other safety measures to avoid facing financial calamity — and a public relations catastrophe — again.

Under the agreement approved by California regulators, PG&E can't use any of its additional revenue to pay for its bankruptcy settlements or enrich an executive team that has been overhauled in recent years.

But PG&E does plan to use the extra money to help finance grid improvements, additional tree trimming around power lines and take other steps that the company believes will reduce the chances of sparking more fires. The utility is also making changes aimed at decreasing the scope of deliberate blackouts imposed during dry and windy weather conditions that raise wildfire risks in Northern California.

“We want to work to exceed our customers’ expectations when it comes to safely and reliably delivering clean energy, reducing wildfire risk in an ever-changing climate, and building a safe and sustainable energy system," said Robert Kenney, PG&E's vice president of regulatory and external affairs.

The Utility Reform Network, one of the groups that hammered out the rate increase settlement with PG&E late last year, had hoped California regulators would delay approval because of the financial strain stemming from the pandemic.

“Hitting consumers with higher bills right now will only add to their problems," said Mark Toney, TURN's executive director.

The sticker shock of the forthcoming PG&E rate increases has been magnified by the time it took to negotiate them while the utility was still in bankruptcy. Part of the 2021 increases cover the past year, too.

Customers might have been even harder hit if not for the resistance to PG&E's initial plan. The utility originally sought about $2 billion in additional revenue from customer rate increases from 2020 to 2022, according to regulatory documents. The final settlement approved by regulators will instead give PG&E an additional $1.15 billion instead.

NPR’s sites use cookies, similar tracking and storage technologies, and information about the device you use to access our sites (together, “cookies”) to enhance your viewing, listening and user experience, personalize content, personalize messages from NPR’s sponsors, provide social media features, and analyze NPR’s traffic. This information is shared with social media, sponsorship, analytics, and other vendors or service providers. See details.

You may click on “Your Choices” below to learn about and use cookie management tools to limit use of cookies when you visit NPR’s sites. You can adjust your cookie choices in those tools at any time. If you click “Agree and Continue” below, you acknowledge that your cookie choices in those tools will be respected and that you otherwise agree to the use of cookies on NPR’s sites.

YOUR CHOICES

Summary

On March 15th, California’s three investor-owned utilities submitted a joint proposal intended to pressure the CA Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) into making consumer solar two times more expensive than it is today. The utilities’ proposal would put solar out of reach for most working and middle class people, just when recent studies show they make up nearly 50% of today’s market. Fact sheet on utilities’ proposal

At issue: Net Metering

Net energy metering (NEM) allows consumers who have solar on their apartment building or school to generate energy onsite and send extra electricity back to the grid in exchange for a simple bill credit. 

Net metering is the foundation of rooftop solar. Rooftop solar reduces the need to build and maintain power lines. That reduces utility profits. Ru-oh.

Utilities oppose net metering because it reduces the need to build more poles and wires to transport electrons from distant power plants, which in turn cuts into utility profits. Consider:

• According to the CA Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), ratepayers paid over $4.336 billion to cover transmission costs in 2021, up 38 percent from 2016 statewide and up 66% for PG&E customers alone.
• The CPUC also found that customers pay $3.50 for every dollar spent building transmission lines, further loading up utility bills and boosting utility profits.
• But in 2018 alone, rooftop solar and efficiency prompted the state to scale back over 20 power line projects, saving $2.6 billion.
• A new, in-depth study found that going big on rooftop solar would save American households $473 billion in electricity costs over the next thirty years. The study also found that if we instead double down on our current overreliance on long-distance power lines, American households will pay $385 billion more over the same time period.

What the utilities proposed

1) Charge consumers the highest solar fees in America – up to $91/month

• SDG&E residential customers would pay $91/month on average just to have solar on their roof. PG&E customers would pay $86/month; SCE customers would pay $56/month. This is based on a typical 6 kilowatt residential solar system. 
• Non-residential customers would also be hit. A typical school, for example, wanting to invest in solar would be charged an unavoidable $950 monthly fee in PG&E territory, $1,100 in Southern California Edison territory, and $3,400 per month in the San Diego area. This is based on a 250 kilowatt commercial solar system

2) Slash the credit consumers receive for surplus solar electricity sent back to the grid by 77%. This means that when a solar user shares electricity with their neighbor, the utility would charge the neighbor 25 cents while giving the solar user just 5.7 cents in bill credits.

3) Prevent consumers from carrying forward their unused solar credits from month to month. Currently solar users may carry forward their unused credits month to month for one year before they expire.

How this will affect rooftop solar

The utility proposals will make solar unaffordable for working and middle class people, stall out the solar market, and undermine the state’s clean energy goals.

Roughly one in ten California ratepayers have solar, totaling more than a million solar roofs, including 150,000 solar roofs for people receiving discounted energy rates through the CARE program. Those who already have solar won’t likely be affected by the utilities’ proposal. Everyone else: no solar for you unless you’re willing to pay double today’s prices.

In addition, the solar industry supports thousands of small businesses and over 70,000 jobs. A few years ago, the Nevada solar industry collapsed with mass layoffs when the state’s utilities got rid of net metering (later reinstated). 

The utility proposal also contradicts the state’s much-ballyhooed drive to get 100% clean energy, and get people to switch to electric cars and appliances. The California Energy Commission estimates California will need three times as much rooftop solar as it does today to meet its clean energy goals. 

The public is opposed to these proposed changes

A new poll sponsored by the CA Solar & Storage Association and Solar Rights Alliance shows overwhelming public support for net metering, and for expanding solar power in general, and clear public opposition to efforts by utilities to gut net metering. 

Time to fight

The last time utilities tried this kind of power grab was in 2015. Over 100,000 Californians flooded the government with messages, in-person testimony and letters to the newspapers (pictured in the photo above). We succeeded then and can succeed now. But we need you.

Please head over to our new campaign website and take action: www.SaveCaliforniaSolar.org

Link to fact sheet outlining the utilities’ proposal

Cash payouts for wildfire victims from Sonoma County and other Northern California communities hit by blazes linked to PG&E electrical equipment will begin to be disbursed Monday, a milestone more than three years after the October 2017 firestorm.

Individuals with claims that have been substantiated should receive an installment worth 30% of the amount they are owed, according to the trust representing wildfire victims in the PG&E bankruptcy settlement.

Not all of the 71,394 claims from residents and businesses with property losses and those whose loved ones died in the blazes will receive these initial payments — only those whose claims have so far been substantiated.

In an announcement, trustee John Trotter said administrators are moving swiftly to verify claims but the undertaking was “a highly regimented process governed by a multitude of regulations.”

“My goal from day one has been to put money into the pockets of wildfire survivors as quickly as possible, while ensuring we follow the letter of the law and treat every single claimant fairly and with compassion,” said Trotter, a retired state appellate court justice.

Trotter oversees the Fire Victims Trust, created to manage $13.5 billion that PG&E agreed to pay people affected by the October 2017 North Bay fires and two fires in Butte County, one in 2015 and the 2018 Camp fire that destroyed most of Paradise in the Sierra Nevada foothills.

Late last year, Trotter helped push out initial payments of up to $25,000 for thousands of victims out of concern for how the pandemic heaped added economic strain onto people still recovering from major wildfires. Those preliminary payments, which were made even before the claims were verified, have totaled about $79 million so far, according to the trust. They are separate from the payments that begin Monday, which are expected to continue every two weeks for claims that have been fully vetted.

About $30 million will go out the door Monday, trust Administrator Cathy Yanni told the Sacramento Bee. But the volume of claim verifications will grow substantially, and this round of payouts will be “certainly in the hundreds of millions,” Yanni said. The payments will likely take months, she said.

Fire victims have been receiving notices informing them of the total value of their claims. The trust will continue making installments “until the fund is depleted,” according to the trust.

PG&E funded the $13.5 billion trust with equal amounts of cash and stock. The agreement, reached through the company’s bankruptcy case, has drawn concerns following a pg&e payment in the company’s stock values since the settlement.

In January, Trotter told fire victims the fund was “more than $1 billion short of its intended settlement value.”

“That may change, unfortunately either up or down,” Trotter wrote.

PG&E stock, which closed at $11.51 a share Friday, has ranged from a low of $3.55 to $25.19 during the past two tumultuous years.

You can reach Staff Writer Julie Johnson at 707-521-5220 or [email protected] On Twitter @jjpressdem.

SAN RAMON, Calif. -- Pacific Gas & Electric's household customers will be hit with an average rate increase of 8% to help the once-bankrupt utility pay for improvements designed to reduce the risks that its outdated equipment will ignite deadly wildfires in chase bank secured credit card Northern California service territory.

The higher prices, approved Thursday, take effect March 1 and are expected to boost the bills of PG&E's residential customers by an average of $13.44 a month. That may further strain the budgets of people struggling to make ends meet during a recession caused by the pandemic that is causing governments to curtail commerce and corral people at home in an effort to ease the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.

California power regulators approved the increase after two years of wrangling between PG&E and pg&e payment variety of groups battling to limit how much of the financial burden customers should have to shoulder for the utility's long-running neglect of a grid that supplies power to about 16 million people in a sprawling area.

PG&E's outdated equipment was blamed for causing a series of wildfires during 2017 and 2018 that killed more than 120 people and destroyed more than 27,000 homes and other buildings. The damage caused PG&E to file for bankruptcy in 2019, opening a legal avenue for the company to negotiate $25.5 billion in settlements with wildfire victims and others.

The San Francisco utility emerged from bankruptcy five months ago and is now seeking to upgrade its equipment and adopt other safety measures to avoid facing financial calamity — and a public relations catastrophe — again.

Under the agreement approved by California regulators, PG&E can't use any of its additional revenue to pay for its bankruptcy settlements or enrich an executive team that has been overhauled in recent years.

But PG&E does plan to use the extra money to help finance grid improvements, additional tree trimming around power lines and take other steps that the company believes will reduce the chances of sparking more fires. The utility is also making changes aimed at decreasing the scope of deliberate blackouts imposed during dry and windy weather conditions that raise wildfire risks in Northern California.

“We want to work to exceed our customers’ expectations when it comes to safely and reliably delivering clean energy, reducing wildfire risk in an ever-changing climate, and building a safe and sustainable energy system," said Robert Kenney, PG&E's vice president of regulatory and external affairs.

The Utility Reform Network, one of the groups that hammered out the rate increase pg&e payment with PG&E late last year, had hoped California regulators would delay approval because of the financial strain stemming from the pandemic.

“Hitting consumers with higher bills right now will only add to their problems," said Mark Toney, TURN's executive director.

The sticker shock of the forthcoming PG&E rate increases has been magnified by the time it took to negotiate them while the utility was still in bankruptcy. Part of the 2021 increases cover the past year, too.

Customers might have been even harder hit if not for the resistance to PG&E's initial plan. The utility originally sought about $2 billion in additional revenue from customer rate increases from 2020 to 2022, according to regulatory documents. The final settlement approved by regulators will instead give PG&E an additional $1.15 billion instead.

What is Visitor Access?

Visitor Access, also known as One-Time Access, provides access to a limited set of services, including making a payment online. No username or password is required, but you will be asked to provide other identifying information, such as your last name, service-address ZIP code and the last four digits of your Social Security number. We recommend creating an online account for access to all account features, but you’re welcome to use One-Time Access for select tasks such as payments, managing your rate plan and starting service.

What you can do with One-Time Access

• View and pay your bill (a $1.35 convenience fee applies)
• Get help paying your bill:
  • Extend your due date with a payment arrangement
  • Sign up for financial assistance programs such as California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) and Family Electric Rate Assistance (FERA)
• Update your contact information or set the following preferences:
  • Outage Alerts
  • Energy Alerts
  • Payment Arrangement reminders
  • Service Visit reminders
• Manage your electric rate plan:
  • Review a side-by-side cost comparison of all eligible rate plans
  • Pick the electric rate plan best for you

What you can’t do with One-Time Access

These features require signing in to Your Account with a username and password:

• View past billing and payment history
• Set up recurring payments
• Track or analyze your usage

You must also sign in to Your Account to set up certain preferences, such as paperless billing, billing alerts and scheduled-payment alerts.

Summary

On March 15th, California’s three investor-owned utilities submitted a joint proposal intended to pressure the CA Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) into making consumer solar two times more expensive than it is today. The utilities’ proposal would put solar out of reach for most working and middle class people, just when recent studies show they make up nearly 50% of today’s market. Fact sheet on utilities’ proposal

At issue: Net Metering

Net energy metering (NEM) allows consumers who have solar on their apartment building or school to generate energy onsite and send extra electricity back to the grid in exchange for a simple bill credit. 

Net metering is the foundation of rooftop solar. Rooftop solar reduces the need to build and maintain power lines. That reduces utility profits. Ru-oh.

Utilities oppose net metering because it reduces the need to build more poles and wires to transport electrons from distant power plants, which in turn cuts into utility profits. Consider:

• According to the CA Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), ratepayers paid over $4.336 billion to cover transmission costs in 2021, up 38 percent from 2016 statewide and up 66% for PG&E customers alone.
• The CPUC also found that customers pay $3.50 for every dollar spent building transmission lines, further loading up utility bills and boosting utility profits.
• But in 2018 alone, rooftop solar and efficiency prompted the state to scale back over 20 power line projects, saving $2.6 billion.
• A new, in-depth study found that going big on rooftop solar would save American households $473 billion in electricity costs over the next thirty years. The study also found that if we instead double down on our current overreliance on long-distance power lines, American households will pay $385 liberty high school online more over the same time period.

What the utilities proposed

1) Charge consumers the highest solar fees in America – up to $91/month

• SDG&E residential customers would pay $91/month on average just to have solar on their roof. Pg&e payment customers would pay $86/month; SCE customers would pay $56/month. This is based on a typical 6 kilowatt residential solar system. 
• Non-residential customers would also be hit. A typical school, for example, wanting to invest in solar would be charged an unavoidable $950 monthly fee in PG&E territory, $1,100 in Southern California Edison territory, and $3,400 per month in the San Diego area. This is based on a 250 kilowatt commercial solar system

2) Slash the credit consumers receive for surplus solar electricity sent back pg&e payment the grid by 77%. This means that when a solar user shares electricity with their pg&e payment, the utility would charge the neighbor 25 cents while giving the solar user just 5.7 cents in bill credits.

3) Prevent consumers from carrying forward their unused solar credits from month to month. Currently solar users may carry forward their unused credits month to month for one year before they expire.

How this will affect rooftop solar

The utility proposals will make solar unaffordable for working and middle class people, stall out the solar market, and undermine the state’s clean energy goals.

Roughly one in ten California ratepayers have solar, totaling more than a million solar roofs, including 150,000 solar roofs for people receiving discounted energy rates through the CARE program. Those who already have solar won’t likely be affected by the utilities’ proposal. Everyone else: no solar for you unless you’re willing to pay double today’s prices.

In addition, pg&e payment solar industry supports thousands of small businesses and over 70,000 jobs. A few years pg&e payment, the Nevada solar industry collapsed with mass layoffs when the state’s utilities got rid of net metering (later reinstated). 

The utility proposal also contradicts the state’s much-ballyhooed drive to get 100% clean energy, and get people to switch to electric cars and appliances. The California Energy Commission estimates California will need three times as much rooftop solar as it does today to meet its clean energy goals. 

The public is opposed to these proposed changes

A new poll sponsored by the CA Solar & Storage Association and Solar Rights Alliance shows overwhelming public support for net metering, and for expanding solar power in general, and clear public opposition to efforts by utilities to gut net metering. 

Time to fight

The last time utilities tried this kind of power grab was in 2015. Over 100,000 Californians flooded the government with messages, in-person testimony and letters to the newspapers (pictured in the photo above). We succeeded then and can succeed now. But we need you.

Please head over to our new campaign website and take action: www.SaveCaliforniaSolar.org

Link to fact sheet outlining the utilities’ proposal

References

Tips

Writer Bio