Latest news with #CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission
San Francisco Chronicle
11 hours ago
- General
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: S.F. firefighters answer call when alarm sounds. That's why they deserve what they're paid
Regarding 'S.F. firefighter overtime pay is over the top. Why does the city allow this dubious practice?' (Letters to the Editor, Aug. 8): When I was 9 in the early '60s, Mom made the mistake of showing me and my three sisters what Dad did for work at his firehouse in the Mission District. We heard the sirens start, and we followed the noise to a burning building. Mom never took the family to watch Dad work again. The nightmare of flames and the immediacy of death their father confronted was not something she wanted her children to know about. One Thanksgiving, long after Dad had retired, a fire broke out near our home in the Excelsior. Dad was just about to carve the turkey. As the sirens approached, he went out to observe. The firefighters responding were shorthanded, and all were busy. Dad noticed a hose wasn't connected to a hydrant. He stretched it and linked it to the hydrant. Dad got a big smile and thanks from the firefighter who noticed. I was never prouder of my dad. Dad died in 1983 from cancer due to inhalation of smoke on the job. Letter writer Beth Brown should realize that the pay for San Francisco firefighters she decries as an 'insatiable appetite' and 'greed' is well-deserved. These heroic men and women work shifts of 24 hours on, 48 off, with death tugging at their elbows each time the alarm sounds. John R. Wallace, Mill Valley Hold PG&E accountable The primary reason is the lack of any accountability in the rate-making process from the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates the investor-owned utilities, like PG&E. The state's utilities have done everything they can to increase their profits by building capital-intensive, and in many cases, unnecessary transmission and distribution infrastructure. At the same time, the utilities have used their political muscle to suppress the use of grid-enhancing technologies, methods to expand the capacity of the grid with much less capital-intensive strategies. Because utilities get a guaranteed rate of return on capital deployed, they have no incentive to use less expensive methods, so ratepayers end up taking it on the chin. And despite what the story said, we can do something about it by supporting consumer advocacy groups like The Utility Reform Network and the Solar Rights Alliance. Rick Brown, Petaluma Dems have to fight Regarding 'California can never win a race to the bottom with Trump on redistricting ' (Open Forum, Aug. 10): Taking the high road, as Michelle Obama once stated, has always been a losing political strategy for Democrats. Stating that 'turning the other cheek would be real gangster' shows that it's time for Joe Matthews to retire from political writing. He's not reading the political landscape. Republicans, conservatives and corporations have been beating the Democrats and progressives over the head with name-calling and falsehoods for decades. The right wing is winning at the ballot box and in the courts. Look who controls the U.S. Capitol and most statehouses. It's time Democrats fight back, even if it requires getting dirty. Michael Santos, Antelope, Sacramento County Spread the music
San Francisco Chronicle
5 days ago
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
California Supreme Court kicks decision on rooftop solar rates to lower court
The state Supreme Court ordered a lower court Thursday to reconsider, under a more demanding standard, a California Public Utilities Commission decision that has increased rates for the 1.5 million homes and businesses using rooftop solar systems to generate electricity. The court did not order reduced rates for solar users, but the standard it set for lower courts — requiring them to consider whether the commission has followed the law, and considered the costs and benefits of power generation it is regulating — may lead to a reversal of the rate increases that the CPUC approved in 2022. A state appeals court that upheld the commission's decision used 'an unduly deferential standard of review,' Justice Leondra Kruger wrote in Thursday's 7-0 ruling. She quoted legislative findings in a 1998 state law that 'the activities of the energy, telecommunications, and transportation industries will require expanded access to the court system at all levels.' While the court stopped short of overturning the CPUC's decision, its ruling was welcomed by environmental groups that challenged the commission's action and sought to lower rooftop solar rates. 'I'm relieved to see the state's highest court rein in this runaway commission, which is putting corporate utilities ahead of Californians' pocketbooks, the climate and the law,' said attorney Roger Lin of the Center for Biological Diversity. 'Now we get our day in court,' said Bernadette Del Chiaro, a vice president of the Environmental Working Group. 'This is a precedent much bigger than rooftop solar.' In its 2022 decision, the CPUC reduced the state's subsidies to households with solar systems, payments to compensate them for the electricity they generate and provide to the power grid. The commission said those subsidies raise electricity rates for most customers. But rooftop-solar advocates said the payments were authorized by state law, reduced pollution and improved conditions in low-income communities. They said the commission's decision has greatly reduced solar installations in California, increasing air pollution from conventional electric generation and actually increasing costs for other ratepayers. At the federal level, the Environmental Protection Agency, under President Donald Trump, is reportedly considering a plan to cut off $7 billion in federal grants to states and other recipients for rooftop-solar projects serving lower- and middle-income residents. The funding program, authorized by a law signed by President Joe Biden, was designed to enable more than 900,000 households to install solar systems. The budget bill that Trump signed last month will also eliminate federal tax credits for homeowners and businesses who purchase and install solar systems after 2025. According to a UC Irvine study in 2023, the average cost to install solar panels in California was $16,380, but was reduced to $11,466 by the tax credits, which were first provided by federal law in 1978. The case is Center for Biological Diversity v. Public Utilities Commission, No. S283614.
Business Insider
31-07-2025
- Automotive
- Business Insider
Tesla's 'ride-hailing' service is now live in San Francisco, Elon Musk says
Tesla is rolling out its ride-hailing service in San Francisco — but don't call it a robotaxi. "You can now ride-hail a Tesla in the SF Bay Area, in addition to Austin," wrote Tesla CEO Elon Musk in a post on X in the early hours of Thursday. Tesla AI's X account also confirmed that invitations to the "ride-hailing service" were being sent out and posted a map of the service's operating area, which covers the Bay Area, Fremont, and central San Jose. Musk and Tesla did not refer to the service as a robotaxi. Business Insider previously reported that the company would launch its robotaxi service in California this weekend. According to an internal memo viewed by BI's Grace Kay, the invite-only service would launch with safety drivers behind the wheel. A subsequent app update told users that robotaxi rides in California would take place with a safety driver using Tesla's Full Self-Driving (Supervised) technology. A video shared on X by Tesla influencer Teslaconomics of what they said was their first ride on the Bay Area service appears to confirm that Tesla is using safety drivers in California, and that the company is charging for the rides. California has strict regulations covering autonomous taxi services. Rules in Texas, where Tesla has been operating its robotaxis since June, are less stringent. The company is yet to apply for the permits required to test and deploy fully driverless taxis in California, a spokesperson for the California DMV told BI last week. Tesla does hold a transportation charter permit from the California Public Utilities Commission, which the agency said allows the EV giant to transport members of the public in a "non-AV" vehicle with a driver. Musk has set ambitious goals for Tesla's robotaxis, telling investors last week that he expected the service to be available to around half of the US population by the end of the year. Tesla, the California DMW, and the California Public Utilities Commission did not immediately respond to requests for comment, sent outside normal working hours.
Time of India
31-07-2025
- Automotive
- Time of India
Tesla starts ride-hailing in San Francisco, no reference to self-driving
Academy Empower your mind, elevate your skills Tesla CEO Elon Musk said on Thursday the company has launched its ride-hailing service in San Francisco's Bay Area, but did not clarify whether it uses self-driving vehicles The rollout highlights the regulatory hurdles Tesla faces as it pivots from cooling EV demand to autonomous driving, with California's rules potentially delaying Musk's target of deploying robotaxis across half the US by year-end. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) said last week that Tesla is not allowed to "test or transport the public" with or without a driver in a self-driving vehicle."You can now ride-hail a Tesla in the SF Bay Area, in addition to Austin," Musk said in a post on X, without adding other only has a permit from California's Department of Motor Vehicles to test self-driving vehicles with a safety driver on public roads. It does not have the permits needed to collect fares in restriction forces the company to rely on chauffeur-style operations in the Bay Area, contrasting with its more advanced autonomous pilot in Austin, where safety monitors oversee self-driving Model Y vehicles without active driving did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for additional details.
Canada News.Net
29-07-2025
- Automotive
- Canada News.Net
Tesla's Bay Area ride service won't be autonomous yet
SAN FRANCISCO, California: Tesla is rolling out a new ride service in the San Francisco Bay Area, but it won't be the fully autonomous robotaxis CEO Elon Musk has long promised. Instead, the electric vehicle maker will offer a human-driven, chauffeur-style service to a limited group of users, according to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Despite recent statements from Musk and Tesla executives about regulatory progress, the company does not currently hold the necessary permits to deploy self-driving vehicles in California, the regulator clarified on Friday. Tesla's upcoming Bay Area service will rely on human drivers operating traditional vehicles, not autonomous ones. The company told the CPUC it intends to offer rides to "friends and family of employees" and "select members of the public" under a charter permit it already holds. This allows Tesla to provide transportation as long as a licensed human driver is behind the wheel. The service may use Tesla's Full Self-Driving (Supervised) feature, which can perform many driving functions, but state law does not classify that as autonomous driving since the human driver is expected to remain in control at all times. The clarification comes after some confusion caused by Musk's comments during an earnings call this week. He said Tesla was "getting the regulatory permission to launch" robotaxi services in specific markets, including the Bay Area. Business Insider reported that a robotaxi service was imminent, but Tesla has not applied for any of the permits required to operate autonomous vehicles in California. Ashok Elluswamy, who heads Tesla's self-driving team, said during the same earnings call that the company would launch a robotaxi program "with the person in the driver's seat… while we wait for regulatory approval." Tesla has been testing a limited autonomous pilot in Austin, Texas, using Model Y SUVs where human safety monitors sit in the front passenger seat. However, in California, the CPUC said Tesla "is not allowed to test or transport the public" in any vehicle operating autonomously, even if a safety driver is present. To run a paid robotaxi service in California, companies must first go through a pilot phase and secure multiple permits from both the CPUC and the Department of Motor Vehicles. Tesla has not yet begun that process.
