In that post http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EVLN-PG-E-wants-CA-residential-customers-to-pay-653M-for-public-EVSE-tp4673785.html
I added that PG&E is still turning a profit even though they had to pay for the humongous damage from them NOT doing their job (not checking CH4 pipelines properly or at all) and they were the cause of a very co$tly residential ch4 fire in a SF area city (it wiped out several homes, like a bomb went off). Where I live, PG&E repair crews sometimes live (they come and go). While quite rightly proud of the hard-work their employees do to keep their huge N.CA grid up, the pge.com employee was disgusted with the 'typical dirty tricks CEOs do' and filled me in on some theirs has done, is doing, and will do. Its like we (society) allow 'high-pay' rewarding of people in CEO positions to do sociopath http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sociopath /psychopath http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/723848 things with a simple lack of conscious. As a CA resident, I am still outraged (like a 1,2 punch to the face) that NRG that was sued by CA for over-billing CA residents and agreed to compensate by installing EVSE in CA, has yet to keep their promise: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/jan/31/nrg-expands-charge-network/ NRG/eVgo is years behind CA EVSE-installation settlement-schedule Jan. 31, 2015 and now PG&E wants ratepayers to pay for that very same EVSE NRG should have installed. Ratepayers already paid once with NRG's over billing, and then the second punch: PG&E wants ratepayers to pay even more for PG&E's $making scheme!?! I see plenty of newswires that show that PG&E is not the only utility that seeks to ca$h in on public EVSE, thinking it would be a money maker for them. Of course, they are going into this fairly blind and inexperienced, so as a money maker, IMO I think they will not do that well. Most plugin drivers are happier not having to deal with so many different EVSE networks to contend with, so adding more just adds to the heap-of-stink. NO, if pge.com wants to get into the EVSE business, then pge.com should get their act together (do their EV-use homework) and fund it themselves (like any other EVSE company), and not burden the CA ratepayer with another of PG&E's botched debacles. IMO, it would be wise for pge.com customers to turn off the tube (TV), and spend that time communicating to the CA PUC http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/contactus/ their dislike of funding PG&E's misadventure, and also communicate to the CA government https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php they want NRG in court (again) to keep their CA EVSE installation commitment {brucedp.150m.com} -- View this message in context: http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/Re-EVLN-PG-E-wants-CA-ratepayers-to-pay-bill-for-653M-public-tp4673788p4673790.html Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
