Connect with us

California

California budget cuts could decimate key virtual power plant programs

Published

on

California budget cuts could decimate key virtual power plant programs


This has made the DSGS program a key target for VPP developers in California, with $295 million budgeted for participants in 2022 and 2023. About 1,300 participants in DSGS-funded programs were able to reduce peak load by about 315 megawatts and provide more than 3,100 megawatt-hours of emergency response during hot summer weather in the summer of 2022, according to the companies that signed on to the protest letter to state lawmakers. Those companies have planned to provide much more emergency capacity in the summer of 2024.”

This newly expanded and re-designed program was finally launching for a full summer in 2024,” Perez of Advanced Energy United told Canary Media in an email. But the proposed budget cuts would eliminate $186.5 million in DSGS funding through this year and next, leaving only $75 million deferred to 2025 and 2026, according to industry groups tracking the latest budget figures. That would severely impact” participating companies’ efforts, since they need to have predictability to invest in market development, customer onboarding, and program setup,” the letter stated.

If the proposed reductions go through, I don’t know how that will affect new and current participants,” said Cisco DeVries, executive vice president of Renew Home, the company formed by the merger of Google Nest’s smart thermostat energy-shifting service Nest Renew and California-based residential demand response aggregator Ohmconnect. Renew Home works with hundreds of thousands of households in California and participated in the DSGS program in 2022 and 2023.

The potential for VPPs in California is particularly strong, given the state’s preponderance of homes equipped with rooftop solar, backup batteries, smart thermostats, and electric vehicle chargers. In an April report, consultancy Brattle Group projected that VPPs could enable $550 million per year in consumer savings in California and provide in excess of 15 percent of the state’s peak grid demand by 2035.

Advertisement

Jigar Shah, head of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office, which has issued billions of dollars in loan guarantees to support VPP deployments, highlighted that report in an April social media post, citing it as evidence that VPPs are the lowest cost way” for utilities and regulators to handle load growth and lower rates for everyone.”

But with the future of the DSGS program now very much in doubt, it’s unclear how California utility regulators and policymakers will enable that potential, DeVries said. A big part of how we were going to figure out the next phase of demand response and virtual power plants in the state of California was the CEC programs, both DSGS and others,” he said. So now we’re back to the drawing board. We don’t have the answers to what’s going to happen next.”

That’s a problem for a state that’s simultaneously trying to control electric utility rates that are among the highest and the fastest-rising in the country, keep the lights on during stressful grid events, and retire a bunch of dirty old fossil fuel plants,” he said.

The missing money for alternatives to fossil fuels

To date, the lion’s share of California’s emergency-grid-support funds has gone toward extending the lifespan of its fossil fuel plants. The state has already spent about $426 million from those emergency programs to build or procure emergency and temporary” power generators that burn fossil gas or diesel fuel, according to a May report from the state Department of Water Resources, which administers that program.

Another $1.3 billion in funding has been promised to companies that own and operate aging fossil-gas-fired peaker” power plants in Southern California that were slated to be closed in 2020 under environmental regulations. Those plants are a particularly egregious target for state funding, environmental advocates said, given that they burden surrounding communities with harmful air pollution, and have been unprofitable to operate absent state subsidies.

Advertisement

What’s more, these power plants take days to ramp up in advance of predicted grid emergencies and are much more expensive than the capacity that can be enlisted through the DSGS program, which consists of customers that can almost instantaneously reduce power use or commit battery power to helping the grid, Perez said.

The proposed cuts to DSGS and DEBA aren’t the only state funds for cleaner alternatives that might fail to materialize. Part of the emergency plan laid out in 2022 called for directing $900 million to incentives to fund battery installations in lower-income and disadvantaged communities. But only $280 million of that has been set aside in the state budget.

To maintain commitments to fossil fuel resources and cut back on deployment of new resources — clean resources that could be used for emergencies — is short-term thinking and just seems kind of backwards,” said Ed Smeloff, managing director of the regulatory team at nonprofit group Vote Solar. It’s important to have strategic reserves for the future, because we are going to have extreme weather events. That’s a fact of life. But those reserves should be compatible with the state’s clean energy policies.”

It’s possible that state leaders aim to instead rely on the larger amount of utility-scale batteries to solve California’s grid problems, Smeloff said. In April, Newsom announced that California has deployed 10 gigawatts of installed battery capacity, a 13-fold increase from five years ago, and enough to meet about 20 percent of the peak electricity demand for the grid managed by the California Independent System Operator (CAISO).

But it’s not clear that California can continue that breakneck pace of utility-scale battery expansion in the face of its crowded transmission-grid interconnection queues, Smeloff said. Nor is relying on large-scale batteries alone the most cost-effective path for the state. A 2020 report from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that smarter utilization of demand-side resources could replace the need for billions of dollars’ worth of batteries and other utility-scale resources.

Advertisement

At the same time, California residents are being encouraged by state clean energy and climate policies to buy electric appliances, heat pumps, and EVs as rising electric rates make them more costly to operate, he said. Finding some way for those customers to earn money for programming those devices to relieve grid peaks is a vital counterbalance to the higher electric bills they’ll face as they electrify.

It’s also likely that state leaders believe that the grid emergencies of 2020 and 2022 aren’t as dire today, Smeloff said. An assessment from CAISO last month indicates that the state has a surplus of resources to meet expected peak grid demands this summer, he noted — a stronger position, at least on paper, than the state has had in years.

But as McMahon of the California Energy Storage Association noted, We had a mild summer last year. But what happens the year after that if we haven’t planned for it?”



Source link

Advertisement

California

Amid rising costs, California and L.A. initiatives aim to tax the ultra-rich

Published

on

Amid rising costs, California and L.A. initiatives aim to tax the ultra-rich


California has billionaires on the brain.

Last week union activists, hoisting giant cutouts of money bags and a cigar-smoking boss, announced a proposal to raise Los Angeles city taxes on companies with “overpaid” chief executives.

They rallied in front of a symbol of the uber rich: the futuristic, steel-covered Tesla Diner owned by Elon Musk, the world’s richest man.

Meanwhile, a “billionaire tax” proposal prompted some of the wealthiest Californians to consider fleeing the state, amid arguments that they would take their tax revenue — and the companies they run — with them, hurting the ordinary residents the proposal is designed to help.

Advertisement

The focus on taxing the richest of the rich comes amid a growing affordability crisis in California, home to the nation’s most expensive housing market and highest income tax.

More than 200 billionaires reside in California, more than any other state, according to a group of law and economics professors at UC Berkeley, UC Davis and the University of Missouri who helped draft the statewide billionaire tax proposal, which proponents are hoping to place on the November ballot.

And they are getting richer. The collective wealth of the state’s billionaires surged from $300 billion in 2011 to $2.2 trillion in October 2025, according to a December report by those professors. In Los Angeles, where the median sale price of $1 million puts home ownership out of reach for many residents, prominent billionaires include David Geffen, Steven Spielberg and Magic Johnson.

One conspicuous billionaire is especially unpopular in California: President Trump, who, despite campaigning on bringing down the cost of living, recently called the word “affordability” a “con job” as he redecorated the White House in gold.

“In a deep blue state like California that has voted against Donald Trump by such large numbers in the last three elections, voters are even more predisposed to be suspicious of billionaires, because he’s now the person with whom they associate the status,” said Dan Schnur, a politics professor at USC, UC Berkeley and Pepperdine.

Advertisement

The state and local tax-the-billionaires proposals, he said, are “about retribution,” much like last year’s Proposition 50, which temporarily redraws the state’s congressional districts to favor Democrats as a counterweight to Trump’s efforts to increase Republican seats in Texas.

To get the statewide billionaire tax proposal on the November ballot, supporters need to collect nearly 875,000 signatures by June 24.

The measure would impose a one-time tax of up to 5% on taxpayers and trusts with assets, such as businesses, art and intellectual property, valued at more than $1 billion. It would apply to billionaires who were residents of the state on Jan. 1, with the option of spreading the tax payment over five years.

Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, its main backer, said it will raise $100 billion. Most of those funds would be used for healthcare programs, with the remaining 10% going to food assistance and education programs, the union said.

Suzanne Jimenez, the union’s chief of staff, said Friday that “catastrophic” federal funding cuts stemming from Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act will force hospitals to close, eliminate healthcare jobs and cause insurance premiums to spike, leaving senior citizens and veterans with limited access to services.

Advertisement

The California Budget & Policy Center estimates that as many as 3.4 million Californians could lose Medi-Cal coverage and rural hospitals could close unless a new funding source is found.

Jimenez called the proposal “a modest tax” that “affects few people.”

But Gov. Gavin Newsom vowed to stop the billionaire tax, arguing that California can’t isolate itself from the other 49 states.

“We’re in a competitive environment. People have this simple luxury, particularly people of that status, they already have two or three homes outside the state,” Newsom said at the New York Times’ DealBook Summit last month. “It’s a simple issue. You’ve got to be pragmatic about it.”

The billionaire tax would temporarily increase revenues by tens of billions spread over several years, but if billionaires move away, the state could lose “hundreds of millions of dollars or more per year,” according to the nonpartisan California Legislative Analyst’s Office.

Advertisement

Some of California’s wealthiest say they are indeed heading for the exits.

Andy Fang, the billionaire co-founder of DoorDash, wrote on social media: “I love California. Born and raised there. But stupid wealth tax proposals like this make it irresponsible for me not to plan leaving the state.”

Peter Thiel, the billionaire co-founder of PayPal and Palantir, announced in December that his investment firm opened a new Miami office. He donated $3 million that month to a political action committee connected to the California Business Roundtable, which is fighting the measure.

State records show that Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin have been cutting ties to California and moving business interests out of state.

Rick Caruso, the billionaire real estate developer who self-funded his losing 2022 L.A. mayoral campaign to the tune of more than $100 million, said in a statement that “the proposed 5% asset tax is a very bad policy. It will deliver nothing it promises and instead hurt California with lost jobs and hundreds of millions a year in lost revenue from existing income taxes.”

Advertisement

Ending months of speculation, Caruso announced Friday he will not challenge Mayor Karen Bass again, nor will he run for governor in a race that includes billionaire hedge fund founder Tom Steyer.

In Los Angeles, supporters of the “Overpaid CEO Tax” announced outside the Tesla Diner that they must collect 140,000 signatures in the next 120 days to get the measure on the November ballot. The measure would raise taxes on companies whose CEOs make at least 50 times more than their median-paid employee. It would apply only to companies with 1,000 or more employees.

The Fair Games Coalition, a collection of labor groups including the Los Angeles teachers union, is sponsoring the measure, which would allocate 70% of the revenue to housing for working families, 20% to street and sidewalk repairs and 5% to after-school programs and access to fresh food.

Business groups have denounced it, saying it would drive companies out of the city.

“Luxury for a few, while those who cook, who clean, who build, who teach, who write — the people who make the city prosperous — are stretched to the breaking point,” Kurt Petersen, co-president of the airport and hotel workers union Unite Here Local 11, said at Musk’s diner, describing it as an avatar for an unjust L.A. economy.

Advertisement

A similar effort to increase taxes on companies with disproportionately paid CEOs is underway in San Francisco, where voters already approved a levy on such businesses in 2020.

On Friday, Doug Herman, a spokesperson for Bass’ reelection campaign, said she has “not taken a position” on the state or city wealth tax proposals. But at her campaign launch last month, Bass framed the mayoral race as “a choice between working people and the billionaire class who treat public office as their next vanity project.”

Jeremy Padawer, a toy industry executive and animated TV producer who lost his home in the Palisades fire, said the mayor’s framing of the race as a battle against billionaires feels contrived, especially given the intense criticism of her handling of the fire.

Power is as relevant as money, and Bass is “the most powerful person in the room,” said Padawer, who organized the “They Let Us Burn” rally on the one-year anniversary of the fire.

“I know a lot of billionaires,” Padawer said. “And I think that billionaires have a propensity to do a lot of good, but they also have the propensity to do a lot of bad.”

Advertisement

Times staff writer Queenie Wong contributed to this report.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

California hands No. 14 North Carolina its second straight loss in Bay Area, 84-78

Published

on

California hands No. 14 North Carolina its second straight loss in Bay Area, 84-78


BERKELEY, Calif. — – John Camden scored 20 points and Dai Dai Ames and Justin Pippen each added 19 as California built a 20-point lead and held off No. 14 North Carolina 84-78 on Saturday.

The Tar Heels (14-4, 2/3 Atlantic Coast Conference) absorbed their second straight loss in the Bay Area; they fell 95-90 at Stanford on Wednesday.

Cal (14-5, 2-4) owned that 20-point lead early in the second half. A basket by Ames gave the Bears a 74-55 edge with 8:26 left before the Tar Heels rallied.

Carolina cut its deficit to 81-78 on a 3-pointer by Henri Veesaar with 19 seconds remaining but Pippen hit two foul shots with 10 seconds to go to just about clinch the decision.

Advertisement

Pippen had a game-high five assists. His father Scottie, a Basketball Hall of Famer, was part of the announced crowd of 8,077 at Haas Pavilion.

Cal had a decided advantage in 3-point shooting: The Bears went 14 for 26 from beyond the arc. The Heels were 9 for 27.

Freshman Caleb Wilson led Carolina with 17 points. Veesaar had 14 points and 10 rebounds.

The Bears’ Lee Dort grabbed a game-high 12 boards.

California scored the game’s first seven points, put together an 11-0 run to take a 26-13 lead and did not trail at any point Saturday.

Advertisement

The Bears took their biggest lead of the first half when Ames hit a jumper with 14 seconds remaining to put Cal up 54-35. Derek Dixon’s layup just before the buzzer cut the Heels’ deficit to 54-37 at the break.

Camden led all scorers in the half with 16 points as Cal went 10 for 16 from beyond the arc in the opening 20 minutes.

Up next

North Carolina hosts Notre Dame on Wednesday.

Cal plays at Stanford next Saturday.

Advertisement

——

Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here and here (AP News mobile app). AP college basketball: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-basketball-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-basketballbr/]

Copyright © 2026 ESPN Internet Ventures. All rights reserved.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

Billionaire developer Rick Caruso will not run for L.A. mayor or California governor

Published

on

Billionaire developer Rick Caruso will not run for L.A. mayor or California governor


Billionaire developer Rick Caruso will not run for Los Angeles mayor or California governor, after months of speculation that he would seek one of the two posts.

Caruso, who had been teasing a possible run for months, made his decision Friday, saying it came after “many heartfelt conversations” with his family.

“Though my name will not be on a ballot, my work continues,” Caruso said on X. “Public service does not require a title. It is, and always will be, my calling.”

Caruso’s plans were the talk of political circles for many months. Recently, he seemed to confirm that he would seek one of the two positions.

Advertisement

When asked by a reporter on Jan. 7 if it was possible he would not run for any position, Caruso responded: “That option is pretty much off the table now.”

Caruso said he will focus on his nonprofit, Steadfast LA, which brings industry leaders together to help with the Palisades fire recovery.

The 66-year-old developer behind popular L.A. malls like the Grove and the Americana at Brand spent $100 million of his own fortune against Karen Bass in 2022, outspending her 11 to 1 in his failed bid. But Bass beat him by nearly 10 percentage points.

Caruso served as president of the L.A. Police Commission in the 2000s and helped the city hire William Bratton as police chief. He was appointed to the Department of Water and Power board in 1984, at age 26 — the youngest commissioner in city history at the time.

Caruso has steadily critiqued the mayor online and in public appearances since 2022, seemingly honing and refining his argument for voters to reject the incumbent, whom he has described as incompetent.

Advertisement

“Her record is so bad,” Caruso said at a town hall he hosted at the Americana on Nov. 3.

Caruso’s decision not to run for mayor solidifies the 2026 field against Bass. Former Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Austin Beutner is running a moderate campaign, with arguments about Bass’ response to the Palisades fire and quality of life concerns that are similar to Caruso’s. The developer’s entry could have thrown a wrench into Beutner’s campaign.

Bass also faces a challenge from her left with Rae Huang, a community organizer and reverend, announcing a run for mayor in November.

Most recently, the entry of former reality star and Palisades fire victim Spencer Pratt has added new intrigue to the race.

Bass’ campaign declined to comment on Caruso’s decision.

Advertisement

As for governor, some voters in deep blue pockets of the state may have rejected Caruso, a former Republican who registered as a Democrat in 2022 and has faced questions over his past party registration.

Still, the developer, who has made public safety and quality of life issues his main talking points, might have attracted California voters unhappy with the current crop of gubernatorial candidates.

No single candidate has dominated the field, while some potential contenders, including Sen. Alex Padilla and Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, have announced they’re not running.

As he weighed a bid for governor in the last year, Caruso traveled multiple times to Sacramento and around the state to meet with labor leaders, community groups and politicians.

“My guess is he did polling and he did not see a path forward,” said Sara Sadhwani, a professor of politics at Pomona College.

Advertisement

“Had he jumped into either race and lost, it would have made the prospects of elected office even further away,” she said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending