A plan to install 590 solar panels at AT&T Park is generating lots of positive public relations for the San Francisco Giants and for Pacific Gas & Electric.
March 21, 2007 (Press Release) --
A plan to install 590 solar panels at AT&T Park is generating lots of positive public relations for the San Francisco Giants and for Pacific Gas & Electric.
But it turns out the public will be asked to pay the bill.
PG&E announced Tuesday that it inaccurately described the project a day earlier when it told the Mercury News that PG&E shareholders will pay the costs. Instead, the company, an investor-owned utility that is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission, will go to the PUC during its next "general rate case" in 2009 and ask for permission to bill PG&E's customers for the purchase, installation and maintenance of the panels.
"Yesterday we said the project was going to be shareholder-funded but that was inaccurate," said PG&E spokesman Keely Wachs. "In the interest of focusing on what's important, which is solar energy and protecting California's environment, we wanted to correct that."
PG&E will own the panels and the electricity they provide. Installation is scheduled to begin next month and take about two months. Most of the Sharp panels will be built like awnings over archways on the back of AT&T Park near McCovey Cove. A news conference is scheduled for this morning at the stadium with PG&E officials, Giants executives and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to formally announce the project.
Consumer groups aren't happy.
"Its hypocritical for PG&E, the Giants and the mayor of San Francisco to say they are doing something good for the environment when the public is going to be asked to pay for it, especially when PG&E doesn't have permission for it yet from the PUC," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Los Angeles.
Court said that consumer groups will ask the PUC to require PG&E to pay the bill.
"This was an attempt to get a nice PR ploy, and if that's the case, then PG&E shareholders should pick up the tab," Court said.
Wachs said PG&E plans to install $7.5 million in solar panels around San Francisco, including $1.5 million worth at the baseball stadium, and will ask its shareholders to pay $2.5 million and ratepayers to pay $5 million. If the PUC approves that, it would add "pennies, probably fractions of pennies," to the average montly PG&E bill, Wachs said.
"It's clear that solar is great for all of us, not only our customers but all of California," he said. "The need to bring solar to market is imperative if we are going to meet the challenges associated with climate change."
Author: Paul Rogers
Source: http://www.mercurynews.com/
But it turns out the public will be asked to pay the bill.
PG&E announced Tuesday that it inaccurately described the project a day earlier when it told the Mercury News that PG&E shareholders will pay the costs. Instead, the company, an investor-owned utility that is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission, will go to the PUC during its next "general rate case" in 2009 and ask for permission to bill PG&E's customers for the purchase, installation and maintenance of the panels.
"Yesterday we said the project was going to be shareholder-funded but that was inaccurate," said PG&E spokesman Keely Wachs. "In the interest of focusing on what's important, which is solar energy and protecting California's environment, we wanted to correct that."
PG&E will own the panels and the electricity they provide. Installation is scheduled to begin next month and take about two months. Most of the Sharp panels will be built like awnings over archways on the back of AT&T Park near McCovey Cove. A news conference is scheduled for this morning at the stadium with PG&E officials, Giants executives and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to formally announce the project.
Consumer groups aren't happy.
"Its hypocritical for PG&E, the Giants and the mayor of San Francisco to say they are doing something good for the environment when the public is going to be asked to pay for it, especially when PG&E doesn't have permission for it yet from the PUC," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Los Angeles.
Court said that consumer groups will ask the PUC to require PG&E to pay the bill.
"This was an attempt to get a nice PR ploy, and if that's the case, then PG&E shareholders should pick up the tab," Court said.
Wachs said PG&E plans to install $7.5 million in solar panels around San Francisco, including $1.5 million worth at the baseball stadium, and will ask its shareholders to pay $2.5 million and ratepayers to pay $5 million. If the PUC approves that, it would add "pennies, probably fractions of pennies," to the average montly PG&E bill, Wachs said.
"It's clear that solar is great for all of us, not only our customers but all of California," he said. "The need to bring solar to market is imperative if we are going to meet the challenges associated with climate change."
Author: Paul Rogers
Source: http://www.mercurynews.com/
Email
Print
SPAM
LEAVE A COMMENT
