Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

kqed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 92 posts

Re: San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

#21

Post by spullara »

simoncion wrote: post #14
infotainment wrote: post #7

The angle of this that people may not realize is that San Francisco already owns the power generation (ie, the Hetch Hetchy dam). [1] PG&E simply owns the wires, and overcharges for their use. [1]: https://www.sfpuc.gov/about-us/our-systems/hetch-hetchy-powe...

> The angle of this that people may not realize is that San Francisco already owns the power generation (ie, the Hetch Hetchy dam). My conclusion might be totally wrong because I'm converting from units that aren't meant to be converted, but... If you filter down to only San Francisco County on this official-looking thingie [0], you see that it claims the city [1] has 5.126 TWh of consumption. Your link [2] claims He…

It generates ~1 TWh per year or about 20% of SFs power. Power generation capacity is always in watts but it also doesn't run at 100% all the time.

Re: San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

#22

Post by jawiggins »

A few months ago I attended an event where a few members of the Board of Supervisors were attending. One person identified themselves as working in this field and pointed out that the current cost plus model incentivizes the company to do all kinds of upgrades that aren't really needed. The BoS member said something like, "Look, we need to just bite the bullet on this one, we're going to overpay, but we are already legally permitted to buy it and doing so will save us a ton of money in the long run because of stuff like that".

I have no personal knowledge, but thought I'd share this experience I had with the ongoing debate.

Re: San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

#24

Post by DuckConference »

simoncion wrote: post #14
infotainment wrote: post #7

The angle of this that people may not realize is that San Francisco already owns the power generation (ie, the Hetch Hetchy dam). [1] PG&E simply owns the wires, and overcharges for their use. [1]: https://www.sfpuc.gov/about-us/our-systems/hetch-hetchy-powe...

> The angle of this that people may not realize is that San Francisco already owns the power generation (ie, the Hetch Hetchy dam). My conclusion might be totally wrong because I'm converting from units that aren't meant to be converted, but... If you filter down to only San Francisco County on this official-looking thingie [0], you see that it claims the city [1] has 5.126 TWh of consumption. Your link [2] claims He…

I would assume 395MW is the nameplate capacity, so you would multiply it by a capacity factor and time to get the energy production in a specific interval. Capacity factor in hydro can vary a lot by season and how much they want to produce vs reservoir levels, but for a back of the envelope 100% capacity factor you have 395 MW × 8,760 hours/year = 3.46TWh/year . Capacity factor could be in the high 90s in good conditions and maximum production but I expect it's a lot lower unless it's a wet year with very few big maintenance jobs needed.

Re: San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

#25

Post by simoncion »

spullara wrote: post #21
simoncion wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The angle of this that people may not realize is that San Francisco already owns the power generation (ie, the Hetch Hetchy dam). My conclusion might be totally wrong because I'm converting from units that aren't meant to be converted, but... If you filter down to only San Francisco County on this official-looking thingie [0], you see that it claims the city [1] has 5.126 TWh of consumption. Your link [2] claims He…

It generates ~1 TWh per year or about 20% of SFs power. Power generation capacity is always in watts but it also doesn't run at 100% all the time.

Ah. So I should have done something like

  395MW * 8760hr = 3,640,200 MWh
to figure out roughly the maximum possible annual demand that could be served by the system? (For the purposes of this question, I'm just doing the -er- dimensional/unit/whatever analysis and ignoring production-capacity-reducing factors that you'd definitely have to factor in to get the real number.)

If so, what a boneheaded, rookie mistake by me. Thanks for the reply.

Re: San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

#26

Post by simpsond »

PG&E is a profitable, publicly traded company... that issues a dividend. They tried to file for bankruptcy after the paradise fire, but they were too big to fail, so they issued new shares with gov protection. CA created a new insurance backstop for them as well. Corporations should not have government assisted (regulated) monopolies with socialized backstops. Yeah, CPUC is supposed to help, but decision makers probably have exposure. It is the same with Sempra and SDG&E and SCE. SMUD seems like a better organization, but what do I know.

Re: San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

#28

Post by simoncion »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #6
FrankWilhoit wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, too: the primary reason to worry about inadequate generation is not cost, but reliability.

The problem in California is not generation nor is it reliability. CAISO has the lowest wholesale electricity costs in the nation, by far; under half the cost of Texas. It also hasn't had a blackout since 2020. The problem is retail side. AKA PG&E, its regulation, governance and forced liabilities. https://cleantechnica.com/2026/05/30/california-lowest-whole...

> CAISO has the lowest wholesale electricity costs in the nation, by far

Much lower than that provided by the TVA? Ages ago, I used to live in an area served by the TVA, and its power prices were notably cheaper than anywhere else. I'd heard that this was because a huge chunk of its power was provided by fission plants, but never investigated.

Re: San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

#29

Post by m463 »

jeffbee wrote: post #13
infotainment wrote: post #7

The angle of this that people may not realize is that San Francisco already owns the power generation (ie, the Hetch Hetchy dam). [1] PG&E simply owns the wires, and overcharges for their use. [1]: https://www.sfpuc.gov/about-us/our-systems/hetch-hetchy-powe...

The other angle that people may not realize is that SF has voted in nine separate elections to not establish a municipal utility. The people of SF demonstrably do not want to take over PG&E, given numerous opportunities. SMUD has cheap power because 100 years ago the people of Sacramento invested a lot of money to establish that utility. What the vocal minority of SF public power people want is magical: cheaper rates…

> people of SF demonstrably do not want to take over PG&E

But PG&E has charged significantly more for power the last few years. Most people easily hit 50c/kwh on their bills.

Compare to Santa Clara, which has their own well run utility, and charges less than half PG&E rates.

https://www.siliconvalleypower.com/residents/rates-and-fees

Re: San Francisco Weighs PG&E Takeover Amid Soaring Utility Costs

#30

Post by Veliladon »

m463 wrote: post #29
jeffbee wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other angle that people may not realize is that SF has voted in nine separate elections to not establish a municipal utility. The people of SF demonstrably do not want to take over PG&E, given numerous opportunities. SMUD has cheap power because 100 years ago the people of Sacramento invested a lot of money to establish that utility. What the vocal minority of SF public power people want is magical: cheaper rates…

> people of SF demonstrably do not want to take over PG&E But PG&E has charged significantly more for power the last few years. Most people easily hit 50c/kwh on their bills. Compare to Santa Clara, which has their own well run utility, and charges less than half PG&E rates. https://www.siliconvalleypower.com/residents/rates-and-fees

>Compare to Santa Clara, which has their own well run utility, and charges less than half PG&E rates.

This. Lived in Santa Clara. SVP is the best utility in California.

Post reply on HN