Mayor Lee supports PG&E's monopoly

|
(21)

After watching Mayor Ed Lee and his appointees subvert the launch of CleanPowerSF and support PG&E's illegal monopoly control of local energy users -- and PG&E's regular attempts to greenwash its dirty power portfolio -- artist Michael Ortlieb developed and submitted this editorial cartoon. Enjoy. 

Comments

voted down a public option. The only reason this clean option is around is because a few activists found a loophole enabling some form of public power to be implemented without a popular vote.

The people are angry about that sleight of hand, and Ed Lee knows that. Lee has the people on his side. the clean power lobby only has ideology on their side.

I support Lee's fight for democracy over ideology.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 1:45 pm

so let me get this straight

the mayor's is blocking a program that is about to strongly compete with PG&E's monopoly on clean energy delivery and rates

and you think that is good for democracy?

how exactly does that work?

Posted by racer x on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 2:04 pm

competition for exactly the reasons you cite. What I am opposed to, however, is unfair competition, and a city-subsidized system that consumers have to opt out of, rather than opt into, is not a level playing field.

Moreover I believe that the costs of clean power are being massaged in a "bait and switch" move, and the entire purpose of this initiative is to drive out PG&E, whereupon we will have no choice gain.

but if Duke Energy, Southern, Dominion, Con-Ed, AEP, Excelon or one of the other major US utilities want to compete here, I'm all for it.

FYI, I also support the tearing down of Hetch-Hetchy dam. See how green and groovy I am?

Posted by Guest on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 2:16 pm

The city won't be subsidizing CleanPowerSF's rates, although taxpayers have subsidized PG&E, including its construction of Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant and several of its hydroelectric projects. And we certainly don't have the ability to opt-out of PG&E power, although it would be simple to opt-out of CleanPowerSF and there would be repeated outreach efforts reminding people of that opportunity. So how exactly is that "unfair competition"? 

Posted by steven on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 2:54 pm

CleanPowerSF is entirely self funded by revenue bonds based on clean energy installation and purchases paid for (but at the same billed rate) by the customers themselves. No tax or rate subsidies are involved at all.

It is the customers themselves who will fund their own competition with PG&E, and the beauty of the whole process is that it will be cheaper, for a far better product, because clean energy is cheaper over its full life time and the small higher up front cost can be spread out over a long repayment period - essentially in a clean energy mortgage.

This is the -ultimate- in consumer self empowerment to combat anti-competitive monopoly.

Do you think it is bad for consumers to collaborate together in this way to compete with corporate monopolies?

Posted by Eric Brooks on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 3:04 pm

Every nation in Europe has rejected a similar plan to give Oil companies centralized control of solar energy.
What 69 nations around the world have done is just require Utilities (PG&E) to pay home owners $0.49 kwh for feeding solar onto the grid.

Why? Because they want solar democracy.
Giving Shell Oil $1 billion is a dumb idea.
SF wants a DECENTRALIZED solar energy system of
roof top solar panels on each home.

CPSF is a Shell Oil scam to build a giant solar farm in Nevada.
That is the opposite of decentralization.
Decentralization is a Green Party key value.

Posted by Paul Kangas on Mar. 05, 2014 @ 9:31 pm

There is no Shell deal anymore. Ask the SFPUC. Shell is no longer likely to be any part of CleanPowerSF

Posted by Eric Brooks on Apr. 07, 2014 @ 9:42 pm

nice subtle morph on the mustache ;)

Posted by racer x on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 2:06 pm

The cartoonist Michael Ortlieb has done a yeomanlike job of integrating details of the story into a familiar tableau in the manner which produces humor. I mean extra compliment by saying the cartoon is surpisingly good. Well done all. Regular feature?

Note:
I am not "troll barrier" and have only twice posted such messages -- perhaps questionably in hopes of having an improvement to offer. The first occasion I committed the major faux pas of leaving my alias in the name field. I did not mean to give the troll a chance to make the anti-troll device an excuse to talk about me instead of the issue of trolling, but it probably made no practical difference anyway.

I suspect in the end, the troll either wants to be the center of attention, or is simply taking glee at being a trouble to other people.

(Trolling is when a person continues to make the same arguments which have been disproven by pretending to not understand the proof, then constantly brings up red herrings to distract from how their arguments have been defeated; which they ultimately claim to have won... as, plainly, nobody believes -- and a number of other similarly bankrupt rhetorical gimmicks.)

No matter the proximate reason behind the trolling, at heart the troll is probably a fundamentally sad person who others should look upon with solemn pity and hopes for them finding a truer meaning in life than acting in a senselessly destructive manner towards their fellows.

In the meantime, the troll barrier is a great idea and people should refrain from reading -- and certainly posting -- responses to comments which follow them.

A troll barrier is probably in order right now, prophylactically.

Posted by lillipublicans on Sep. 26, 2013 @ 12:01 am

I feel sure these alleged "trolls" will recede quaking in fear.

Fortunately for them, it has never happened yet.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2013 @ 6:05 am

this is simply a troll barrier

it is a signpost to indicate to the reader that other anonymous posters on this thread are beginning to purposely diminish the conversation into reactionary hyperbole and/or petty, mean spirited, personal attacks and irrelevant bickering

the barrier is put in place to signal that there is probably little point in reading more replies in the thread past this point

proceed at your own risk

Posted by troll barrier on Sep. 26, 2013 @ 6:21 am

like Hitler for a while now. Godwin's Law is alive and well here, evidently.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2013 @ 6:06 am

this is simply a troll barrier

it is a signpost to indicate to the reader that other anonymous posters on this thread are beginning to purposely diminish the conversation into reactionary hyperbole and/or petty, mean spirited, personal attacks and irrelevant bickering

the barrier is put in place to signal that there is probably little point in reading more replies in the thread past this point

proceed at your own risk

Posted by troll barrier on Sep. 26, 2013 @ 6:22 am

I love Troll Barrier, now can you also do an uneducated post barrier?

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2013 @ 10:47 am

Only an uneducated person would repeat the same thing over and over again in a hopelessly doomed attempt to stifle and suppress free speech on the internet.

The fact that he is having to do it over and over shows it is not effective for, if it were, just once would be enough.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2013 @ 11:01 am

Great cartoon of Shell Oil shill Eric Brooks in a top hat.
"Forgive him, for he knows not what he does." -- Jesus.

Posted by Paul Kangas on Mar. 05, 2014 @ 9:34 pm

I have been the CleanPowerSF organizer in San Francisco who has most vociferously opposed the Shell deal and have continuously asked that Shell be dumped from the CleanPowerSF program, even when that alienated me from other CleanPowerSF supporters.

Thankfully, because of pressure from myself and others, that has now become the reality, and the SFPUC has admitted that it can take on the role that was once proposed for Shell.

Shell is no longer necessary in CleanPowerSF and so is not likely to play any role in the program whatsoever.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Apr. 07, 2014 @ 9:48 pm

Wait...politics and power generation aside...there is nothing either remotely funny or clever or insightful in that cartoon.

Is that really the best you got for sharing? No wonder you don't have a lot of Twitter followers and you posts get maybe 5 shares on Facebook.

Posted by Guest on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 2:01 pm
Posted by Guest on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 2:06 pm

this is simply a troll barrier

it is a signpost to indicate to the reader that other anonymous posters on this thread are beginning to purposely diminish the conversation into reactionary hyperbole and/or petty, mean spirited, personal attacks and irrelevant bickering

the barrier is put in place to signal that there is probably little point in reading more replies in the thread past this point

proceed at your own risk

Posted by troll barrier on Sep. 25, 2013 @ 2:22 pm

Don't be fooled by fraudulent nonprofits, such as Mark Goldes' Aesop Institute. Read reviews: http://greatnonprofits.org/reviews/aesop-institute/166232/

Posted by Guest on Sep. 26, 2013 @ 4:59 am

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.