Ratepayers Subsidize Utilities, Shareholders
* “Part of Utilities’ Windfall Went to Dividends, Parent Firms” (Jan. 24) mentions, in passing, that the ratepayer has paid for the construction of most power facilities in the state. This helps to explain why we Californians paid twice the national rate for power. Most ratepayers are unaware that they have subsidized the utilities and, by extension, their shareholders.
As these power plants were sold off between 1998 and now, why has no one demanded that the utilities reimburse the ratepayers (us) before sharing the money with their parent companies and their shareholders? They either borrowed the money from us, unbeknownst, or stole it from us. Before any other arrangements are made for the utilities, our rates should be adjusted accordingly.
The utility investors seem to think that their investment is guaranteed. Why? No other stock is thought of in that manner.
SHIRLEY D. LINDE
Los Angeles
*
Having worked for the California Energy Commission in the mid-’70s, I am reminded of a visit from Washington Gov. Dixy Lee Ray in 1977. She told the California Legislature that California had to find new energy sources and that the Pacific Northwest cannot continue its supply. I also remember the California eco-nuts’ push not to site the Sundesert nuclear facility; also, the same attitude in shutting down the Rancho Seco nuclear facility. With these two plants running today, there would be no energy crisis.
KENNETH GOLLIHER
Palm Desert
*
California state Sen. Betty Karnette has a short memory (“State Senator Suggests Year-Round Daylight Savings Time,” Jan. 24). Year-round daylight savings has been considered and rejected during earlier energy crises. During December, sunrise time is at 6:59 a.m. on the shortest day. Daylight savings would move it to 7:59 a.m. Children would walk to school in the dark. Our children’s safety continues to be of paramount importance.
KATHERINE A. HOLLEY
Northridge
*
Natural gas was deregulated several years ago. My bill has increased by over 100% this last month. Does that mean natural gas deregulation was wrong and that the state will bail us out?
ITA VANDENBROEK
Westminster
*
While the politicians are figuring out how to cough up billions to the robber barons of the energy industry, I’d like to see at least a billion set aside to actually help solve the problem: Namely, offering free solar panels (including installation) for any homeowner or commercial building owner who asks for them. Now that would help bring down demand (and prices) in a hurry.
I see little, anecdotal stories on TV news shows about individuals who have solar panels, but I’ve seen no indication of any campaign of information on how to buy them, much less any real noise from the politicos in that direction. Let’s wise up!
FRANK SHOFNER
Lake Forest
*
Kudos for your well-balanced description of the California Air Resources Board conflict over electric vehicles in “Auto Makers Bid to Brake Electric Car Program” (Jan. 25) and to S. David Freeman for his excellent suggestions of what the board should do (“A Clean California Needs Electric Cars,” Commentary, Jan. 25).
Don’t believe the auto manufacturers when they say people don’t want battery-electric cars. I want mine. I had leased a GM EV1 for just over a year when they took it away last March for a safety recall. It’s been nearly a year for a stupid retrofit that has been available on the newer model for two years. They sent me a letter promising I’d get it back “soon” with better batteries, so I’m being patient.
I’m under no obligation to accept my car back whenever GM gets through with this recall. But I want my battery-electric EV1 car. It is not an ordinary car. It won’t do L.A. to Vegas on one fill-up, and I can’t get the whole soccer team inside it, but it is the slickest, prettiest, neatest bit of socially conscious, technically adept engineering I ever expect to get into my personal grasp. I really enjoyed driving my EV1, and I’d like it back.
GIL DAWSON
Los Angeles
