The Burlingame Voice

Electricity "Equity": A Shocking Proposal

We have another "Dr. Zhivago Moment" on our hands according to the Mercury News today-- you know the point in the film where the socialist government drone says "It's more fair this way".  "Fair" might be the most mis-used word of this century so far and it is looking like it can hold onto that title quite easily.  Check this out from the Merc article:

PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric, the three major California utilities whose services include electricity, have filed a joint proposal with the state Public Utilities Commission that sketches out proposed changes in monthly bills.

Here’s how the fixed charges would work in the PG&E service territory. The numbers are based on a four-person household:

• Households earning less than $28,000 a year would pay a fixed charge of $15 a month on their electric bills.
• Households with annual income from $28,000 to $69,000 would pay $30 a month.
• Households earning from $69,000 to $180,000 would pay $51 a month.
• Those with incomes above $180,000 would pay $92 a month.

“These are not new charges, but a restructuring of the components of providing and delivering power,” PG&E stated in a post in the Currents section of the utility’s website.

Yeah, right.  Funny I don't recall PG&E or "a qualified, independent state agency or third party responsible for verifying customers’ total household incomes" asking for my household income before.  It would probably cost them more to administer the snooping program than it would bring in.

BNN and the City Review Storm "Learnings"

Did you get the 6am wake-up call from Pacifica yesterday?  I wasn't in town, but I hear it rang 3.5 times and was loud.  Another earthquake prep reminder.  As if we don't have enough to worry about with atmospheric rivers queued up like floats in a parade.  Saturday morning, the City and Burlingame Neighborhood Network co-sponsored a meeting for residents to learn (re-learn?) how we handled the last big storms.  I say re-learn because by a show of hands nearly all of the roughly 75 people there had previously participated in a BNN block drill.

The newly promoted city arborist, Rich Holtz, was the star of the show as much of the content and questions revolved around trees and what it takes to get downed or leaning trees removed.  There is often coordination with PG&E to ensure the lines are de-energized.  My question during the Q&A about how city staff (aside from Park & Rec tree staff) interact with PG&E didn't get much of an answer.  It would be good to know who at the city is "in the know" in real time about power outages by virtue of having a clear contact at PG&E and the ability to update residents beyond what's on PGE.com.

The city is on a four-year cycle for inspecting all city trees.  There was a small amount of Blue Gum Euc-bashing, but the SF Comicle provided a timely defense of Eucs the next day here:

In the Bay Area, the trees that most commonly fall are oaks, eucalyptus, cypress and Monterey pines, said consulting arborist Kevin Hostert. That matches information from the Western Tree Failure Database, which collects data from professional tree managers largely from the Bay Area, said principal investigator Larry Costello.

Coast live oaks and Monterey pines are prone to fungal infection and root rot, and certain types of eucalyptus trees have “pretty shallow” roots, Hostert said. But Hostert and Costello emphasized that these species are not necessarily more dangerous — instead, more of them may fall simply because they are relatively common.

There is that Voice principle again:  a numerator without a denominator is useless information.

BPD and BFD were well-represented and added a lot of detail about how many 911 calls came in.  For instance, on March 14, 119 calls came in, mostly in a three-hour period, as the heart of the storm hit B'game.  The fact that faux 911 calls from landlines and burglar alarms mistakenly go off when power is restored was news to me.  And they all have to be answered.

For me, the highpoint of the session from a learning standpoint was the introduction of the Zello phone app and network by Rik Kasuga of BNN.  Zello adds walkie-talkie capabilities to your cell phone allowing for group calls and direct person-to-person contact.  Assuming the cell networks are up, this can be an effect way for BNN members to communicate in an emergency.  More on that later as I get into it.

The official recap is here and here are the presenters in the Rec Center on a beautiful Saturday morning in B'game talking about a rough couple of days.

 

Time to Disband the Air Quality Board

Some letter writer to the WSJ gets credit for this quip:  "The two things government does best are nothing and overreact".  He was writing about the Silicon Valley Bank bailout, but it fits perfectly with the gas-heater-haters at the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.  I think it's time we disbanded the BAAQMD, fired its staff (who aren't working in the public interest), and send the city council people on the Board back to their cities to Do The Job They Were Elected To Do; which is to make good local decisions.

The back story is a bunch of elected officials, who collectively probably couldn't pass a college-level Physics test, have decided that we shall not have gas water heaters or gas furnaces.  No soup for you even if your current set-up has been in existence for decades, works flawlessly during blackouts and costs way less than the alternative.  The Chronicle attempted to quantify the cost of complying:

The new regulations prohibit the sale or installation of water heaters and furnaces that emit nitrogen oxides after 2027 and 2029, respectively.  Electric water heaters and heat pumps are generally more expensive than their gas counterparts. People in older houses may face additional costs such as electrical panel upgrades, ductwork, rewiring or permits, though there are thousands of dollars of rebates and tax credits available at the federal, state and local levels to offset some of the cost differential. 

The cost of installing a heat pump can vary widely, from $7,000 to more than $20,000, according to various studies and data collected from completed projects. Costs for electric water heaters can range from $2,000 to $7,000. Staff from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the agency that adopted the zero nitrogen oxides regulations, presented average compliance costs at its approval hearing last week: $8,030 for a heat pump and $2,820 for an electric water heater. 

The estimates come from a 2021 study published by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which collected total cost data from 1,739 projects in 15 states, including California, adjusted to the 2019 dollar.   The same study also published average installation costs for gas appliances: $5,096 for a gas furnace and $1,972 for a gas water heater.   Some people and groups have disputed these numbers from their own experience or by pointing to regional data that show much higher installation costs for heat pumps and electric water heaters.

They had California-specific costs (still not Bay Area-specific costs), but chose not to present them at the hearing before the vote--not that it would have mattered:

As part of the approval process, BAAQMD generated a socioeconomic impact analysis that included higher cost estimates from a 2019 Energy and Environmental Economics (E3) study specifically looking at California: between $7,000 to $20,000 of all-in costs for a heat pump depending on the type, and from $3,000 to $4,700 for a heat pump water heater.

The E3 study assumed that pre-1978 homes would need to upgrade to a panel of 200 amps when switching to both a heat pump and water heater, and estimated this would cost $4,256 for single-family homes and $2,744 for low-rise multifamily homes.

And there are higher costs from another data source and one person who highlights yet another unaccounted-for cost--TAXES:

Out of 9,895 heat pumps installed with Tech CLEAN funding, the average total project cost before incentives was $18,842, with an average total incentive of $3,433. For the 1,334 heat pump water heaters that received Tech CLEAN funding, the average total project cost was $7,054, with an average total incentive of $3,617.

The Tech CLEAN data tracks most closely to Redwood City resident Kent Holubar’s experience installing a heat pump last summer. Installation of Holubar’s Mitsubishi heat pump cost $17,875, with another $1,865 required for permits, bringing the total cost to $19,740, Holubar shared with The Chronicle.

Holubar had wanted to make the upgrade for a while and was able to do so with part of his mother’s estate after she passed away. But after the installation, Holubar received an annoying surprise: Holubar’s 1953 home was assessed at $10,000 more than it was before he installed the heat pump because of its air conditioning properties — adding extra property taxes every year, Holubar said.

Also lost in the ozone of government cost studies are the things I mentioned in my letter to the B'game city council and in the comments on the prior Natural Gas: Follow the Science? post.  Things like removing the old pipes and vents, drywall repair and paint, roof repairs to fill the old holes, pouring concrete pads for the new equipment--the list goes on and on.  BUT the big cost that none of these studies capture is the time and effort of the homeowner.  It will likely be enormous and growing worse as the deadlines loom and pass.  No more calling the water heater guy and answering one question:  Do you want a 40 gallon or 50 gallon unit?  Soon it will be "A Project" with all of the typical project management expenses in time, effort and money.   Better to disband the Air Quality Board and leave people to transition if and when they want.

91% of 390 Trees is a Lot of Trees

Last night's big confab with Caltrans and city officials regarding the El Camino Real renewal project was eye-opening for a lot of people.  Probably not regular Voice readers since we have discussed it in 2021 here and here.  The most eye-opening statement made last night was during the Q&A when Caltrans was asked how many of the giant Eucs were scheduled to be cut down.  The answer was "about 9% will remain".  There are about 390 of the historic ones in the 3-mile stretch.

The other way to phrase that is 91% of 390 Eucs will be taken out.  That's 355 giant trees.  Buried in the details of compacted soil, broken sidewalks, retaining walls, sight triangles, sulfur fungus, poor trimming around the power lines, etc is the lead:  355 eucalyptus trees are history--well, we thought they were historic since the grove is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, but really they're just history.  There will be 35 survivors who will stand in testament to their fallen brethren and to the ECR that once was.

There were a number of long-time B'gamers there and one that I had not seen in at least 6 or 7 years came over after the Q&A and asked the Big Questions.  He asked "how many people know about this?  And what are they gonna do when they find out?"  I've been asking myself the same question.  Another knowledgeable long-time local has asked 30 people if they are aware of the tree situation over the last few days.  General awareness is close to nil. 

This project has been in the works for years.  Maybe Caltrans and the city hasn't had a good idea of how many trees would have to go, but they do now.  In the interest of transparency, shouldn't the city send out the short, to-the-point notice that this is coming?  You bet.  Then wait for the outrage to arrive.

I'll double back with more on the proceedings soon.  There were numerous displays and a tabletop exercise looking at the Hillside and Bayswater intersections with measurements, planning tools and tree options.  In the meantime, here is Mayor Brownrigg introducing the B'gamers who are on the ECR task force with some Caltrans people seated behind.

Natural Gas: Follow the science?

We must take note of the national kerfuffle about gas stoves that has been boiling over this week.  It's totally pertinent to B'game because our last city council bought into the climate hype and instituted a "reach code" such that new construction can't have any natural gas--not just stoves, but water heaters, furnaces, and barbeques.  No gas for you!  Now the Feds are making similar noises and then backtracking as the WSJ notes

A Biden appointee on the Consumer Product Safety Commission explicitly threatened to ban gas stoves based on dubious evidence of public-health harm. “This is a hidden hazard,” said commissioner Richard Trumka Jr. “Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.”  After withering public criticism, including by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, the CPSC Chairman denied any plan to ban, and the White House said President Biden also doesn’t want to ban gas stoves. But that’s cold comfort given that the climate left does want to ban them, and progressive cities and states are doing it.

One might ask what is the science behind gas phobia?  Well, today the SF Chronicle actually let a letter to the editor slip through that is pretty clear on the science:

There has lately been a lot of concern about gas ranges and how they can harm indoor air quality, but some of this is too fast and too furious.  As an active researcher in indoor air quality, there can be no doubt that gas cooking produces nitrogen dioxide and that this is bad for respiratory health but the level of concern is far higher than the data show the situation actually warrants. 

Cooking is likely the most polluting thing done in homes. It produces lots of contaminants, regardless of the heat source. Switching to electric may not make the sum total significantly better.  The solution that works regardless of the type of cooking is using your range hood when cooking. Range hoods have been required in California for a long time. Studies have not shown that there would be any significant difference in net harm between gas and electric cooking if you actually use range hoods when cooking.

Max Sherman, retired senior scientist, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

I'll bet if you were one of the 2.4 million PG&E customers that lost power over the last two weeks you were thankful you had a gas stove and some matches even if your range hood or downdraft vent didn't work.  Open a window and enjoy a cup of tea or a bowl of soup.

PG&E: Holding the line so far

I really hope that I am not jinxing things by posting this a couple days before the last of this round of storms plays out.  I have four sump pumps going so I am really hoping....

So far PG&E in south B'game has been solid.  If you told me two weeks ago that we would get the weather and wind we got and the power would stay on the whole time, I would have bet you a C-note that it would not.  In my neighborhood, I would have lost that bet.  This little squib in today's Chron reminded mm how lucky we have been:

All-Pro tight end George Kittle tweeted Thursday night that he had been without power “going on 4 days” — making him one of tens of thousands of Californians still without power due to the recent storms.  “A lil help would be appreciated thanks. Just trying to prepare for something this weekend,” Kittle tweeted at Pacific Gas & Electric Co., alluding to Saturday’s game.

PG&E responded gamely but unspecifically, saying: “We’ve got our offense, defense and special teams on this, George! We’ve got the power back for 2.4M people through the past two weeks’ storms, and we’re gonna get you (and everyone else still out) back as soon as we can!”

The bolded bit is mine.  We had a big tree go down and take out some wires right near St. Paul's Church and I'm sure PG&E had to hustle.  But so far, they are pulling it off.  That correlates with a couple of other good experiences I have had with PG&E over the last year.  Blown transformer, frayed drop wire, etc all fixed in a reasonable amount of time.  EssEff may want to buy PG&E out of their distribution network in the city and run it themselves--which is just hilarious.  Not me, not in B'game.  If you have ever had a job in "operations" where things have to get done regardless of the circumstances, I think you will agree.

Fingers still crossed.

Update:  Jan 19.   Last night's storm which seemed to deliver more rain than predicted appears to be the last one for awhile.  Here's a photo to commemorate the deluge on the Ave.

Solar hypocrisy is expensive

Watching the gyrations of the intertwined energy and transportation sectors of our economy is frustrating at best.  Anyone with a modicum of critical thinking skills has to wonder what our politicians and bureaucrats are thinking?  Last week the CPUC kneecapped the rooftop solar market.  The Comicle writes

For new customers, reduce the amount utilities’ pay them for excess power by at least 75% compared with current rates. The change would not apply to residents with existing solar systems.

Because residents and businesses with solar panels generally have smaller energy bills, they contribute less to a utility company’s fixed costs, such as transmission and distribution networks, which are passed on to ratepayers. As a result, non-solar residents, including low-income residents and renters, carry more of the cost burden.

The solar rules increased bills for customers who do not have rooftop solar by $3.37 billion in 2021, growing to $4.5 billion so far this year, according to the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office.

See what they did there?  People with panels "contribute less to transmission and distribution" costs.  But what about generation costs?  They pour private capital--lots of it-- into helping the utilities avoid those costs.  Another case of lies, damned lies and statistics.  The other push is to get people to add batteries when they put in the panels, so the load is spread better throughout the day and night.  Good idea for a lot of reasons, but crazy expensive and getting more so as the metals that go into batteries get more expensive.  I'll bet the CPUC Public Advocates Office isn't spending any time on looking at where those metals come from (hint:  Russia, China, the Congo with little environmental protections and some slave labor).

Speaking of grid stability, how does the all-out push to force people to buy EVs (by 2035 in California) fit?  The president of Toyota had this to say this week

President Akio Toyoda said he is among the auto industry’s silent majority in questioning whether electric vehicles should be pursued exclusively, comments that reflect a growing uneasiness about how quickly car companies can transition.  “That silent majority is wondering whether EVs are really OK to have as a single option. But they think it’s the trend so they can’t speak out loudly.”

Toyota is still pursuing plug-in hybrids and hydrogen and they have their eye on the cost of all of this

Sticker prices for electric vehicles have also jumped this year because of the rising cost of battery materials, limiting the pool of buyers who can afford one.

In a debate between the "silent majority" that designs, builds and has to sell cars at a profit and the CPUC and Newsom, I'm more comfortable with people who look at all angles of the question--it's good that they aren't staying totally silent.  Newsom in particular has his focus elsewhere, but his ex-wife weighed in on him this week.

Kimberly Guilfoyle made a rare public comment about her ex-husband, California Governor Gavin Newsom, on Sunday.  “In California, they have vowed to get rid of gas-powered cars. A bunch of winners over there. Ask me how I know. I got news for him. He ain’t making it to the White House!”

In the meantime, rooftop solar got more expensive, EVs got more expensive, and electricity got more expensive.  But at least there is more "equity".

Going Solar: One year later check-up

I made the move to rooftop solar a little more than a year ago as described here.  There has been plenty of rumblings about the CPUC reducing the financial benefits, and thus the incentives, to people putting solar on their roofs, but the latest news appears to be some sort of compromise that could maintain the momentum in California.  The one-year point is my check-in to see how it's paying off.  Twelve months after going active is known as the frist "true-up".  Per PG&E, I generated 449 kWh more than I used this past year, i.e. I sent them back 449 kWh.  On a day-by-day basis, it is variable with the weather as I noted here.  What isn't variable is the direction of electricity rates in the state--they are headed up for a variety of reasons.

The next question is "how do I get paid for my "donation" to the grid?".  That turns out to be a bit more complicated since I have Peninsula Clean Energy between my meter and PG&E.  Recall we all got moved to this green non-profit and one would have to opt-out if one didn't want it.  It turns out my credits live with PCE and they do their payouts in April of each year by sending a check to anyone whose balance is more than $100.  I'm at about half of that now based on how the 449 kWh is spread across winter and summer, peak and off-peak pricing.  If the balance is less than a hundred bucks, it rolls over to the next year.

The bottom line appears to be you get to feel good about generating solar juice and if you use a good amount (e.g. perhaps you have a pool with filters and pumps running thru the day) you cover most of your usage costs.  There are still connection costs to be paid, but you probably won't see any windfall each year.

California exodus accelerates in 2022

A year ago, the exodus from our lovely state was news as we discussed here.  The trend has accelerated which should accelerate the review of the state's housing requirement numbers as noted here.  The odd thing about the faulty RHNA numbers is that no one wants to talk about them.  I have mentioned it to several electeds and a watchdog news organization and all I get is crickets.  As a city, try to ignore them and Rob Bonta will be all in your face, but question them and he's silent.  You would think when a state auditor says this about the calculations, someone would go "hold on":

“Overall, our audit determined that HCD does not ensure that its needs assessments are accurate and adequately supported. …This insufficient oversight and lack of support for its considerations risks eroding public confidence that HCD is informing local governments of the appropriate amount of housing they will need.”

If someone is saying "hold on" they are doing it quietly behind closed doors.  But this is what is occurring in California out in the open from the WSJ:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom boasted this week that his state is poised to become the world’s fourth largest economy. Perhaps, thanks to Germany’s economic struggles, but a new Hoover Institution report documents an accelerating business flight from the Golden State.

The report by Hoover senior fellow Lee Ohanian and Spectrum Location Solutions President Joseph Vranich finds that 352 companies moved their headquarters from California between 2018 and 2021. Twice as many businesses left last year (153) than in 2020 and 2019 and three times as many as in 2018. The top destinations: Texas (132), Tennessee (31), Nevada (25), Florida (24) and Arizona (21).

California’s high top marginal income-tax rate (13.3%) punishes small pass-through businesses that pay income taxes at the individual rate as well as managers in C-suites. Manufacturers get slammed by high electricity costs from the state’s climate policies. The Mercatus Center ranks California as the most highly regulated state in the U.S.

Human capital is also becoming more scarce. The report notes that California’s net out-migration to other states increased to 277,000 in 2021 from 34,000 in 2012. Over the last 10 years, California has lost 1.625 million residents to other states—more than the population of Philadelphia. Foreign migration has compensated, but less so in recent years.

Tally that up with the layoffs and hiring slowdowns being reported at the major firms in the Bay Area, and you could say my "confidence is eroded" in the RHNA numbers that drive all of the residential building being jammed down our throats.  And the electoral response?  Raise the top marginal tax rate some more (Prop. 30) under the guise of fighting wildfires and encouraging more electric cars--like we don't already have enough subsidies and browbeating for EVs. 

Shocking Electric Virtue Signaling in San Mateo

The early refrain about "reach codes" to force march people to use the fuel the masters want them to use regardless of the cost or hassle was that "it doesn't affect you, only new construction".  Well, toss that out in San Mateo as their virtue signaling extraordinaire city council just reached further into everyone's pocket.  And they did it with minimal public support.  From the Daily Journal piece

The ordinance addresses existing building construction through remodels. Panel upgrades in residential buildings will require capacity for future electrification, while all residential kitchen and laundry renovations in single-family homes must include outlet installation for future electric use. Residential buildings will be prohibited from fuel gas infrastructure extension for fire pits, grills and pools. When new air conditioning is installed or replaced in homes, heat pump air conditioning will be required. Heat pump water heaters are required during addition or alteration projects that include water heater replacement.

For electric vehicle charging stations, all homes must have a level two EV-ready space and a level one EV-ready space if a second space is provided. Residential and office buildings must also build up level two charging station capacity.

I hope the city council members get more than just a card at Christmas from the electricians' union.  The piece goes on to note "Questions about the financial impact remain...."    You bet they do.  It's not just the higher cost of the appliances or their availability, but also the direct labor costs and the "soft cost" of the homeowner having to project manage all of this.  Remember when you could call a plumber, ask for a new hot water heater and the only question was 40 gallon or 50?  And the whole job was done in 45 minutes?  No more.  The cost of the electricity alone is enough to bust the budget and all the virtue signalers point to is subsidies from PCE--like that is some sort of free money.

We allowed the camel's nose to slip under the tent in Burlingame back in 2020, but let's hope the rest of the animal stays in San Mateo.  It's also time to get into the generator business.