"It's unprecedented for the state to allow one utility to collect the costs of its generating resources from the customers of all three of the major utilities," said Matthew Freedman, an attorney with The Utility Reform Network and the organization's lead attorney on the Diablo case. This raises concerns about fairness and the implications for consumers bearing the financial burden of supporting a single utility's operations, especially when it comes to the financial risks and the effectiveness of extending the nuclear plant's life.
Critics argue that the expense of extended operations at Diablo Canyon, alongside the inherent risks of nuclear energy, ultimately represents a poor deal for California's ratepayers. When legislators authorized this extension, they did not foresee the multitude of fees PG&E would collect from consumers to finance their operations. As David Weisman from the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility pointed out, the commission's decisions effectively fill PG&E's coffers with ratepayer funds at a time when Californians are already burdened by high electricity rates.
Collection
[
|
...
]