Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Braxton1980 180 days ago
1.The last time PG&E had a stock buy back was in 2006.

2. Their dividend yield was 0.8% in 2025, the average for utilities was 3% to 5%. Alaska's APTL was 2.4% to 3.4%

3. Their state lobbying for 2024 to 2025 was less than $4 million. Federal was $60k (both insignificant)

4. California AB 1054 means that almost all of their largest liabilities will be reimbursed via the state wildfire fund. They also have insurance for anything that is not covered. While this won't cover it all the amount actually owned is likely to be low.

I also checked executive bonuses and while the CEOs pay is on the higher end it's not extreme. Not sure how much other executive bonuses could really add up enough to stand on its own as a reason for high electric rates, especially since all your other main arguments seem to be incorrect or exaggerated.

Regarding "back maintenance" this is a standard expense for a utility. Do you have some evidence that it's particularly high for PG&E, taking into account the size of the state?

Why would you make the assumption that the reasons PG&E is expensive(which I haven't even checked) are mostly due to corruption, excess pay or benefits to stock holders, or that the utility has a high liability debt? Most of the reasons you gave are ones that look bad for the leadership of the utility and maybe even the state. Is it possible that due to political propaganda over the long term you default to the assumption that anything a California connected entity does is bad so much so you don't even bother gathering evidence?

Also Hawaii has much higher electric rates than CA.

(Sources for any claims I made are available if requested)
2 comments
inferiorhuman 180 days ago 

  The last time PG&E had a stock buy back was in 2006.
Right and that's money that could've been spent on maintenance.

   Their dividend yield was 0.8% in 2025, the average for utilities was 3% to 5%. Alaska's APTL was 2.4% to 3.4%
This is post bankruptcy, pre-bankruptcy PG&E paid much higher dividends. But again current rate payers are paying for past malfeasance.

  California AB 1054 means that almost all of their largest liabilities will be reimbursed via the state wildfire fund.
lol who do you think pays for that? And before you say "the state" keep in mind PG&E serves about 16 million people in a state of under 40 million.

  I also checked executive bonuses and while the CEOs pay is on the higher end it's not extreme.
Don't forget that they were caught once paying executive bonuses out of their safety budget. I'm sure they've never done that before or since.

  Also Hawaii has much higher electric rates than CA.
No, it doesn't.

https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/documents/billing_and_payme...

https://www.pge.com/assets/pge/docs/account/rate-plans/resid...

HE is claiming a residential customer will pay around $0.45/kWh which is absolutely on par with PG&E. Keep in mind that HE currently charges fixed fees for electric service, PG&E doesn't yet but will add a fixed fee of $24/mo beginning next year. It shouldn't even be close. Practical Engineering covers it but Hawaiian Electric has some of the biggest challenges of all POCOs.

link
fragmede 180 days ago
Peak rate for San Francisco residents is $0.71/kWh
link
hamandcheese 180 days ago
How do you explain Santa Clara's dramatically cheaper electricity compared to San Francisco?
link