I KNOW FOLKS AROUND TOWN have a lot of questions about our city switching to a different electric service provider. Questions like, “How can they do that without my knowledge or input?” and “What does Marin Clean Energy offer that PG&E cannot?” I also learned early on that you won’t get the whole truth by reading The Herald or listening to the global warming alarmists on the mayor’s Community Sustainability Commission. Sadly, that’s been the only source of information on this subject until now. But for those truly interested, the facts are out there, and here’s what I’ve found.
First, what does PG&E provide in the way of electric energy? In 2014, PG&E delivered 28 percent of our electricity from renewable sources like wind, solar, geothermal, bioenergy and small hydro. That’s 28 percent and when you add it to nuclear (22 percent) and large hydro (10 percent), that’s 60 percent of PG&E’s total power mix from clean, carbon-free sources — and it’s growing.
There’s more. This year PG&E is offering a new clean energy program to their green-minded customers. PG&E will buy energy on behalf of participants from newly developed small and mid-sized solar projects in the PG&E service area. Customers who enroll can choose to cover either 50 or 100 percent of their energy use. Interestingly, while researching this and comparing to other utilities, I found that PG&E already sells some of the cleanest energy in the United States, and the rate of carbon emissions from PG&E’s delivered electricity is only one-third the national average.
Second, what is Marin Clean Energy (MCE) and what does it offer? MCE is what’s known as a community choice aggregation (CCA), which was created in California in 2011 (SB 790) by environmental activists/lobbyists. It is allowed to switch customers from their electric utility (such as PG&E) without their knowledge or permission. It’s just a legalized form of “slamming,” which you may remember was once used by the telecommunications industry and is now against the law.
So, what does MCE offer? MCE produces nothing, transmits and distributes nothing, maintains and repairs nothing. MCE claims to “address climate change by reducing energy-related greenhouse gas emissions,” but that claim is difficult to understand when the majority of their renewable energy sources are from Washington and Oregon. MCE is actually a power broker, similar to Enron, that buys some renewable energy and also buys PG&E power in bulk and sells it to consumers at roughly the same rate. Then MCE makes this power “greener” through buying Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), which are actually shares of renewable energy production anywhere in the U.S. When these RECs are applied to your nonrenewable electricity, it is then counted as renewable. Whatever amount of energy MCE procures, PG&E “backs off” that same amount of renewable energy already being delivered.
MCE claims to give our community “choice,” but their definition of choice is the “opt-out” provision in SB 790. A 2014 survey of 400 residents in the city of Richmond, which joined MCE in 2013, revealed nearly 75 percent were largely unfamiliar with the CCA that serves the region. The residents had no knowledge that they were already enrolled with MCE and thought PG&E was their electric service provider. That’s just what MCE is banking on. They understand that many residents are too busy with their daily lives to pay attention, or that they perhaps trust their elected officials to do what’s right on their behalf.
In 2014 a group of consumers attempted to reform the “opt-out” provision of SB 790 by simply changing it to an “opt-in,” thereby leveling the playing field by returning “choice” to the consumer. That attempt, AB 2145, was defeated in the state Senate on Aug. 30, 2014, by that same group of environmental activists/lobbyists. Not only did they defeat it, they also lied about it. Groups like NO2145.org made false statements that AB 2145 would “limit consumer choice,” “reduce competition,” “infringe on local government decision-making power,” etc. Listed on NO2145.org’s website under Local Governments and Elected Officials who defeated AB 2145 are “City of Benicia” and “Mayor Elizabeth Patterson, City of Benicia.” Are you beginning to connect the dots?
So now that you have the facts and you know that PG&E provides a much cleaner and greener product than MCE, you’re likely asking why, upon the recommendation of our city manager, would the mayor and City Council vote unanimously to switch your electric energy provider to MCE without your knowledge or input. It should be noted that Councilmember Mark Hughes did not vote on the issue, as he voluntarily recused himself, being a former PG&E employee. I wonder if, now that the facts are clear, the mayor and Council can reverse themselves and “opt-out” of their poor decision to make a bad deal on our behalf. Is it too late to say, “Oops, we screwed up”? Why is Councilmember Alan Schwartzman already on the MCE Board of Directors? I suppose these are all good questions for our mayor and Council.
MCE has already begun its “outreach” program, reminding customers of the May 1 switch and the opportunity to “opt-out” and remain with PG&E. State law requires MCE to provide this information campaign, but we know they will seize the opportunity to further sell their inferior product. In my mind, it’s a no-brainer to “opt-out” — but the question still remains, why were we even put in this position?
Al Thompson is a 35-year Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
Al has a lot of good points. Also, though while MCE claims to save you a little money they do not guarantee it. I resent having to spend an hour of my time today to “opt out” . Our City Council clearly made a mistake getting in bed with Marin C E.
Al, Right on point. I remember the day the OPT IN legislation was rejected. Our Mayor was elated. I also think that was a clear signal to our Mayor and her environmentalists minions that they had better push MCE quickly before people woke up.
There are a couple of other main issues that need to be shared with our fellow Benicians. If interested, contact me at dualcab@comcast.net. Thanks for your good work. Dennis Lowry
I live in Pittsburg and just attended an MCE presentation. I didn;t get it and it didn’t make sense to me. I am very upset that I have to contact MCE to opt out. The city council is infringing on our private personal lives. I would like to know what are the couple of other main issues you would like to share.
It is very simple. When was the last time you saw a MCE service vehicle anywhere? You have not. You can blame your very liberal state government for this. All you are doing is buying the product from a third party with the backing of the State of California. You will get the same energy someone who does not chose MCE. All comes from the same grid. No separate line to your house. PG&E still delivers and services your energy account.. Yes your bill could be lower but not by much. The big sell is MCE says more of their energy comes from renewable sources. That is true but once it goes to the grid it is watered down and every energy customers draws from ,the same source.
Draws from the conglomerate of sources would be more accurate. There is not just one source.
And on savings, last month (fairly typical for me) I saved $17.41 by using MCE compared to PG&E. One can judge for themselves if $10 to $20/month savings is “not much”
Thanks, Greg. It’s been over three years since this happened in Benicia. Time has been the judge and things don’t look bad at all. Susan should have nothing to worry about.
Thomas you bought into the savings. There is very little if any. Besides you do not get what you pay for. Only one grid and we all draw from it. Not always as it seems. Even Greg corrected his estimates.
All i know is that after opting out I now get a bill from PG&E that includes an increase in my bill of $20,00 for an MCE electric generation charge!! Per month?? This is a scam since it purports to also be charged my PG&E bill even if i use either company!
Greg not sure which MCE plan you have. As of 3-1-18 MCE rates were 55% 101.43 vs PG&E at 104.09= $2.66 savings. MCE 100% 105.94 vs PG&E 104.09= savings of 1.85. These savings are per month. Please explain the $17.41 savings you had. I believe with that explanation we could all better understand your savings. I could be wrong. Your explanation would clear that up. Thank you.
Greg, ave 451 KWh.
Greg my bill was $103.72 for 454 kWh. Within typical use for comparison. MCE about &102.00. Just where is my savings of $10/20. Confused. Help me out.
For the Feb 23-March 23 2o18 bill (which included a PG&E rate increase on March 1, so the charges are split) total of about 460 kwHr; This is for MCE 50%, the bill shows the total PG&E charge, then deducts the power cost of PGE power supplied by PGE and adds the cost of PGE power: MCE generation was 31.41, PGE deducted for that generation was 48.69. Net $17.28 savings. The rate on PG&E is a bit complicated by the tiered rate charges, so it is not linear and therefore (obviously) it depends on use. The original savings I had was on the order of $5 to $9/month, but PG&E rates have since gone up faster than MCE.
Sorry, deducts PGE generation of power supplied by MCE then adds the cost of MCE generated power.
I missed a charge, PCIA (PG&E charging me for “indifference”, i.e., stranded costs, which is $15 so my net savings is about $2.50. Not sure when the contracts run out and that goes off.
For the long term for PG&E, the more customers who leave, the more fixed costs get stranded to the remaining customers. Hence these types of charges (similar to what they do to those with solar power).
As the costs are very similar and there is not a $10/20 savings per month. I stick with PG&E. The other kicker is that MCE customers get the same electricity from the grid that I get from PG&E. There is no direct line to an MCE customer.
Interesting article.
The goal of clean environment and renewable energy is worthy. But the method used by the city council and the apparent conflicts of interests is abhorrent. This whole thing smells of nanny state politics and crony government.
After researching I chose to opt out. Not an easy task. The web site is a bit mis-leading.
If this were a truly democratic and fair process, the city would have used Opt In giving the population a chance to vote on options. Instead, Benicians are slammed and must spend time to correct an enforced choice.
I say … Remember this event next election. Remember the city council members who forced this upon populace.
The problem is, I’m not exactly thrilled with PG&E either. Just look at the San Bruno fiasco. But either way we’re still going to use PG&E’s infrastructure. The whole thing stinks like a gas leak.
Strongly agree with All Thompson, and Dennis Lowry,. We have had for the last 15 years Photovoltaic (electric) and water solar at our home in Benicia. Contacted MCE clean Energy, informed them of our solar systems , that I paid PG & E a monthly $5.00 for hook-up and annually a minimal amount, less than the monthly charge MCE uses as a sample in their recent letter. I was advised that as a solar customer I could research their web site and learn about the benefit for solar customers to opt in.. I don’t want to use much of my time on this and advised MCE that they have the obligation to advise solar customers in the same manner as they did in their recent letter to all PG & E customers in Benicia. Considering that the average home will save annually $17.28 I do not see the benefit in this, Actually, considering the present low interest rates for mortgages the home owner would be better of to take out an mortgage or additional mortgage and have a a photovoltaic solar system installed (not leased). Just the Income tax benefit on this mortgage will be better than the $17.28
I opted out yesterday for many of the reasons detailed above, but mostly because I don’t see why change for a $1.74 per month. The opt out process was very easy – so much so that I have kept a record of the time, date and the email so when it gets screwed up I can prove I opted out.
I couldn’t agree with Al Thompson more. I have known Al Thompson since he moved to Benicia and have found him to be credible and factual in everything he has put his name to, and I don’t doubt a word of what he has stated in his article. I have opted out for several reasons, on of which I don’t think the City’s Brain Trust has thought this through in its entirety. Other areas in the North Bay seems to be having problems with this arrangement…All I can say is at this point, “If you haven’t made up your mind which way you are going to go, do your diligent research. In the end, I’m sure you will agree with Al Thompson’s assessment of this program.
All Marin is doing is looking for folks to pick up risk. The City might be in for an unfortunate surprise. Reading the MCE flier one sees no guarantee of any savings. Instead there are a bunch of weasel words saying estimated saving are based on this and that. Risk in the energy markets is a big potential liability for the City Budget and resident who don’t spend the time to opt out
I never have been a fan of PG & E However, in my opinion the whole picture is incorrectly drawn by MCE Clean Energy. PG & E has been in business for many years and of course when they started, the only known method of generating and delivery electricity was with power plants powered with coal or oil Subsequently cleaner methods of generating electricity were developed. It is known that PG & E is on a course of converting to generating clean energy, but one can not expect that they will be able to do this over night. They simply can not tear down their coal and oil burning power plants and have them replaced the next day with clean energy plants. It will take some time. Now there has appeared a group of people called MCE Clean Energy who who appeared within recent years andpromotes that their energy is clean energy only. Of course they don’t have the older “dirty” power plants to content with and is immediately able to deliver clean energy. City of Benicia, you did not practice a fair analogy. The way I see it, there is a small group of people who are now “milking PG & E. It was PG & E that developed, build with their labor, power plants, the grit, etc. It apparent to me that a group of people within MCE Clean Energy is probably receiving a nice salary which is actually being paid by everyone that is “Opting In” by switching from PG & E to MCE Clean Energy. Well I did not, I “Opted Out” this date
I’d just like to point out that there are no oil-burning power plants in California. Fortunately we have moved beyond that, as has most of the country.
I take that back. There is still one power plant in CA that is, in part oil-fired (second to natural gas). However, it is located in Carlsbad and is owned by NRG.
That’s not quite accurate. More than half of California’s self generation is from internal combustion engines that run on diesel fuel. They are limited in operation by permit, but they still comprise a large segment of industrial and commercial self generation power. See details at CPUC: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/DistGen/sgip/sgipreports.htm
Not to mention all the diesel-fueled emergency generators. None-the-less, none are directly owned or operated by PG&E, or other utilities in the state.
Of course do realize when at times consumption of electricity in California is higher than what is generated in California, electricity is purchase by our electric provider from “Out of State”. providers How are these “out of State” electric providers generating electricity? Do they have, Clean, Oil or Coal Power plants ? Finally has MCE addressed the problem of “High Consumption” days?
After reading this I have to wonder whether the MCE deal will really help the city reduce its carbon emissions. Sounds more like a shell game.
Another troubling question is who bears the financial risk of failure. Does anyone remember what happened when Enron slammed its California customers back to the utility during the 1999 -2000 electric crisis? The state’s regulated utilities scrambled to buy power for all Enron’s customers and had to buy that power off the CA power exchange at spot prices which were at an all time high. CA regulated utilities suddenly faced huge financial risk and sought the Governor’s help. PG&E went bankrupt. The department of water resources stepped in to procure power contracts and stabilize the market. To pay the state back and save the utilities, the CA Public Utilities Commission reregulated the power industry and punished Enron’s customers by imposing a “cost responsibility surcharge” on former Enron customers — which they had to pay for years.
I don’t know much about the financial stability of MCE and how thoroughly the City assessed the risk of failure before they made this deal. But back in 1999-2000, there was no reason to think Enron would fail. They were one of Americas most admired companies, among the Fortune 100, one of the top 100 companies to work for, the smartest guys in the room.
While I like the idea of being able to choose a power provider and what flavor of power they deliver, neither MCE nor our city leaders have provided an explanation about how Benicians would be protected from MCE’s failure. In fact, from the information I have read, it sounds like Benicia customers bear all the financial risk in this arrangement whether we opt to continue PG&E service or not. It doesn’t seem fair or transparent so my family has opted out.
Solar or Wind for your home will be bought by MCE, where as PG&E will only pay you for the max that you use to bring your power cost to $0, but you still have to pay the other costs. MCE will promote more GREEN power where PG&E does not want you to be more self sufficient. The PG&E infrastructure was bought at paid for by all of us, when we gave PG&E a power monopoly, and PG&E is getting paid a transmission fee for maintaining it whether we buy power from PG&E or MCE.
Being able to sell all your power to MCE can be a revenue for you and your family too. It has been said that utilities wants smart meters to be able to charge you more during the day when usage is high, which will be great for PG&E (not it’s customers) but it will be even better for customer of MCE.
Mr. Rizzi,
From what you wrote it appears that you do not have a photovoltaic solar system. As homeowners that do have a solar system primarily have such a system for their own use and not to make money. These solar owners, after one (1) year generation and consumption will have either a small credit or debit with their electric provider. Furthermore in my very recent communication with MCE Clean Energy I have learned that they have yet to communicate in writing with those home owners that do have solar and how they will deal with them in this matter. I was advised by MCE that such a writing is forthcoming. From your writing it appears that you may have some “inside” information. If it is correct of what you wrote, “Being able to sell all your power to MCE” would be of great interest to the Internal Revenue Service and the Franchise Tax Board
http://www.mcecleanenergy.org/residential-solar/
The above link describes in good detail how MCE is encouraging local people to go solar or wind. You are correct existing solar homeowners at best with PG&E would only have to pay a small fee, and would forfeit the extra power to PG&E for FREE. This is why existing solar is scaled to each homeowners usage instead of what can they best produce.