Source: CBS News | By Tori Apodaca

The Utility Reform Network, which advocates on behalf of ratepayers, has argued that a faster and cheaper way to reduce wildfire risk is to insulate power lines instead of burying them.

It appears the commission agrees. Both of its proposals would approve rate increases sufficient to bury less than 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) of lines.

Still, "both proposed decisions adopt substantial and painful increases to monthly bills, far beyond the cost of inflation, which (we believe) should be a cap for bill increases," said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network.

Power bills for about 16 million people in Northern California will likely increase after state regulators released two rate proposals for one of the nation's largest utilities Wednesday.

The California Public Utilities Commission is finishing up its once-every-four-years review of Pacific Gas & Electric, the Oakland-based utility that provides electric and gas service to a 70,000-square-mile (181,000-square-kilometer) area in northern and central parts of the state. The commission must approve how much PG&E can charge customers and how it will spend that money.

Source: The San Joaquin Valley Sun | By Daniel Gligich

“[B]oth proposed decisions adopt substantial and painful increases to monthly bills, far beyond the cost of inflation, which (we believe) should be a cap for bill increases,” The Utility Reform Network Executive Director Mark Toney told the Associated Press.

Ratepayer advocate The Utility Reform Network has offered a different solution for PG&E to keep rates from increasing: insulating the power lines instead of moving them underground. Advocates argue that PG&E could save money and protect more lines through insulation.

Source: Caledonian Record | By Adam Beam

The Utility Reform Network, which advocates on behalf of ratepayers, said one proposal would increase the bill for a typical residential customer by $28 a month by 2026. They estimate the other proposal would increase the typical residential bill by $24 per month.

“Both proposed decisions adopt substantial and painful increases to monthly bills, far beyond the cost of inflation, which (we believe) should be a cap for bill increases,” said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network.

Power bills for about 16 million people in Northern California will likely increase after state regulators released two rate proposals for one of the nation's largest utilities Wednesday.

The California Public Utilities Commission is finishing up its once-every-four-years review of Pacific Gas & Electric, the Oakland-based utility that provides electric and gas service to a 70,000-square-mile (181,000-square-kilometer) area in northern and central parts of the state. The commission must approve how much PG&E can charge customers and how it will spend that money.

Source: KCRA | By Adam Beam

The Utility Reform Network, which advocates on behalf of ratepayers, has argued that a faster and cheaper way to reduce wildfire risk is to insulate power lines instead of burying them.

It appears the commission agrees. Both of its proposals would approve rate increases sufficient to bury less than 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) of lines.

Still, "both proposed decisions adopt substantial and painful increases to monthly bills, far beyond the cost of inflation, which (we believe) should be a cap for bill increases," said Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network.

Power bills for about 16 million people in Northern California will likely increase after state regulators released two rate proposals for one of the nation's largest utilities Wednesday.

The California Public Utilities Commission is finishing up its once-every-four-years review of Pacific Gas & Electric, the Oakland-based utility that provides electric and gas service to a 70,000-square-mile (181,000-square-kilometer) area in northern and central parts of the state. The commission must approve how much PG&E can charge customers and how it will spend that money.

Source: The Mercury News | By George Avalos

“Both proposed decisions adopt painful increases to monthly bills, far beyond the cost of inflation cap for bill increases advocated by TURN,” said Mark Toney, TURN’s executive director. …

“This was a sound rejection of PG&E’s proposal of only insulating 320 miles of power lines and burying 2,000 miles of power lines, which would cost $5.9 billion,” TURN stated.

The proposal from the administrative law judge correlates closely with TURN’s plan to insulate 1,800 miles of power lines and bury 200 miles of power lines, at a total cost of $2.1 billion, according to Toney.

“Both proposed decisions supported TURN’s position that insulating overhead power lines is faster and cheaper for wildfire safety than burying lines,” Toney said.

This week, officials with the state Public Utilities Commission that regulates PG&E issued two proposals that would allow the utility to increase the amount of revenue it can extract from ratepayers in 2023. One proposal was fashioned by one of the five powerful commissioners with the state PUC while a second proposal was crafted by a PUC administrative law judge.

Under one of the proposals issued by state regulators, PG&E customers would face a jump of $28 a month in their utility bills, according to estimates released Thursday by The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, a consumer group.

The other proposal isn’t much better: PG&E customers would face a jump of $24 a month, TURN’s calculations show.

Source: Mercury News | By George Avalos

All of this, however, could squeeze PG&E customers who already must endure fast-rising monthly bills, warned Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, or TURN. The full state PUC is expected to make a final decision by year’s end on the rate case.

“We have a real affordability crisis for utility costs,” Toney said. “One of the biggest cost drivers is this massive expense for burying 10,000 miles of PG&E power lines.”

TURN, a consumer group, has a straightforward plan for power line safety: insulate the lines.

PG&E customers could greatly benefit from the insulation of power lines rather than a program to bury them underground, in TURN’s view.

“Insulated lines are completed much more quickly than burying the lines and at a fraction of the cost,” Toney said. “You are not waiting 10 to 20 years to get the safety you need. You are doing it within a few years.”

The cost of insulation of overhead lines would be about $800,000 a mile, Toney estimated. The cost to bury 10,000 miles of PG&E power lines is roughly $3.7 million to $5.2 million a mile, he added.

Toney, however, notes that Southern California Edison, the principal provider of electricity services in sprawling Los Angeles County and nearby regions, has embarked on a quest to insulate 8,000 miles of overhead power lines, apparently preferring that approach to bury lines.

“Covered conductor is a critical tool to quickly mitigate the threat of wildfires that could be caused by debris blowing into power lines. It helps keep our communities safe,” Steve Powell, Edison’s chief executive officer, stated in July 2022 in a prepared release.

“We support wildfire safety,” Toney said. “We don’t want bare wires all over the place.”

Toney believes that the PG&E power line burial program might oblige the company’s customers to help line the pockets of wealthy investors on Wall Street.

“PG&E’s scheme to underground power lines is the most expensive and most costly method of tackling this challenge,” Toney said. “But it does provide Wall Street investors with a $60 billion gift, paid for by consumers.”

Source: KTVU Fox 2 | By Tom Vacar

"The decision that the CPUC is about to make, PG&E could raise your monthly bill $50 or more a month," said Mark Toney, the executive director of The Utility Reform Network (TURN).

Over the lifetime of the decision — up to 20 years — TURN calculates that each customer's portion could be around $18,000. …

Over the past decade, TURN says that Southern California Edison has installed 5000 miles of insulated power lines overhead. Thus far, PG&E has buried roughly 300 miles of power lines, incurring a cost of about $3 million per mile.

"The insulating of those lines is way better for consumers. It's way better for wildfire safety, and it's just gonna be done safer and cheaper," said Toney.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) plans to unveil a proposed decision concerning PG&E's requested rate hikes.

The utility company says the increases are crucial as it aims to bury 10,000 miles of power lines as a preventative measure against wildfires in high-risk regions. This increase is substantial.

Source: TIME.com | By Simon Shah

“Undergrounding is an effective, but extraordinarily expensive mitigation [strategy,]” says Katy Morsony, staff attorney at the Utility Reform Network (TURN), a utility consumer advocacy organization in California. “It needs to be used strategically, so that it's providing the most risk reduction where it's deployed.” …

TURN has been advocating for cover conductors, which Morsony says provide multi-layered insulation to protect lines from accidental contact with trees and brush. Morsony says the cover conductors protect against a number of different wildfire causes and are faster to install and more cost-effective than undergrounding.

While the exact cause of the wildfire remains unknown, Hawaiian Electric is not the first electric company to find itself facing potential liability in the aftermath of climate-related disasters. As electric companies across the U.S. begin to take steps to reduce the risks of utility-fueled fires, experts tell TIME that modernizing the electric grid and planning for extreme weather events—including having power turn-off plans and preemptively updating utility equipment—needs to be a priority in an increasingly changing climate.

Source: Mercury News | By Mercury News and East Bay Times Editorial Boards

The regulators should carefully consider charges leveled by watchdog The Utility Reform Network (TURN), which contends that PG&E continues to avoid cheaper, effective alternative approaches, including insulating power lines in high-risk wildfire areas. TURN executive director Mark Toney says undergrounding power lines is too expensive and takes an inordinately long time to complete. He maintains that Southern California Edison’s and San Diego Gas and Electric’s use of insulated lines is cost-effective and reduces the need to shut off power when tree limbs fall on electric lines

State regulators must carefully scrutinize PG&E’s wildfire-safety strategy shift.

The giant utility has a long and criminal history of putting profits before safety. And the state has an equally long, ugly history of failing to perform its oversight role. This time regulators must get it right.

Source: ABC7 News | By Tim Johns

Instead of the vegetation management program, PG&E plans on relying on other fire prevention tools [like burying power lines].

"That is going to cost billions and billions of dollars and take well over a decade," said Mark Toney, of The Utility Reform Network.

A shift in strategy for PG&E in their battle against wildfires. After four years and $2 billion in money spent, the company says it's moving away from its enhanced vegetation management program….

The announcement is unwelcome news to many who worry it could lead to more unnecessary wildfires.

Source: The Press Democrat | By Marisa Endicott

“We’re concerned that PG&E is not appropriately considering alternatives,” said Iain Fisher with the Public Advocates Office, which advocates for ratepayers at the CPUC. Fisher is particularly wary of the almost 8,000 miles slated for after 2026.

By comparison, Southern California Edison is also burying power lines but is much more focused on covered conductor work, which adds a protective layer to overhead wires.

While burying power lines has undeniable long-term benefits, critics point out that utilities have incentive to favor such projects as capital investments because they increase profits for shareholders, whereas something like vegetation management is just a business expense.

And, with so much focus on undergrounding, some worry there is less capacity to focus on short-term and medium-term system upkeep and wildfire prevention.