From Dominion’s brochure on the PIPP program.

By Steve Haner

Four years after approval, a state program to provide lower electricity costs to low income families is still struggling to get going.  Administrative costs have far exceeded any actual benefits to utility customers to date.

It is called the Percentage of Income Payment Program (PIPP) and was created by the 2020 General Assembly as part of the Virginia Clean Economy Act. Almost three years ago, both Appalachian Power Company and Dominion Energy Virginia received permission to charge extra on their customer monthly bills to fund it.

Both companies have now filed updates with the State Corporation Commission and are seeking to adjust the amount they collect from general customers.  Dominion, which had enrolled 8,600 PIPP beneficiary accounts as of late March, is seeking to eliminate its monthly charge for a while. Appalachian, which still had zero customers enrolled by the time of its report, has applied to raise its surcharge.

Both are relatively tiny amounts so far. Just how large and how expensive the program might become over time remains anybody’s guess, but as utility costs grow so will the total amount of subsidies and surcharges. The intention is to limit a poor family’s electric bill to 10 percent of income if they use electricity for heat, and 6 percent if they use some other heating source.

So, another cost driver for the long term will be the continued push from government to eliminate the use of anything but electricity for heat. Natural gas and heating oil are squarely in the crosshairs of the Biden Administration and others who accept the climate catastrophe narrative and blame it on carbon-based fuels.

It is also important to remember that residential customers who qualify for PIPP will eventually be exempt from paying any of the construction and financing costs of Dominion’s growing offshore wind empire. That will be another way for all the Dominion customers not part of PIPP to subsidize those who are.

The SCC set things up to start enrolling people in PIPP in late 2023, but Dominion reports it didn’t sign up anybody until late January of this year. The approvals are actually screened by the Department of Social Services, which also has its costs paid out of the pot of money the utilities collect. The new state budget just approved raised the allowed overhead charge for the bureaucrats to $5.5 million annually from the initial $3 million.

Dominion reported that as of March 31 it has provided $807,000 in subsidies to those customers, most of whom did use electricity for heat. So, that was for just two months, and not all were enrolled the whole time. The average subsidy was $170, partly to reduce their current bills and partly to retire any unpaid prior bills on their accounts. (Yes, that is yet another way general customers subsidize the PIPP households, by retiring their overdue bills.)

During the initial period Dominion also collected $541,000 for its internal administrative costs. For the new rate-year starting November 2024 it projects $1.5 million in administrative costs.

Dominion’s initial surcharge to customers, another of those ubiquitous “riders” listed separately on monthly bills, is just 73 cents per 1,000 kilowatt hours used. The rate is the same for all classes of customer. An unspent balance has accumulated, so Dominion now proposes to reduce the surcharge to zero. It also reserves the right to come back to the SCC before the end of the next rate period if costs accelerate and deplete that balance.

Appalachian started its bill charge very small, about 4 cents on that same 1,000 kwh. It now proposes to raise it to $1.32 effective June 1 and raise about $20 million per year. It is projecting that 30,000 of its customers will eventually qualify, about two-thirds of them using electric heat, with an annual benefit cost of $13.5 million.

Appalachian also notes there remains confusion over whether in order to collect PIPP, the customer needs to participate in an energy efficiency program. An SCC order in 2020 considered that to be a precursor, but the state DSS guidelines do not. It asks the SCC for clarification.

The annual reporting requirements ask the utilities to report how many of the PIPP households are being or have been served by a program to reduce energy usage, and just how much energy has been saved. Both reported that too little data exists yet to say.

In its report, Dominion said about 1,000 of its first 8,600 enrollees had participated in a company-sponsored energy demand reduction program, and another 300 lived in properties where previous owners or tenants had done so.

To recap, this rate subsidy for the poor was approved four years ago now, and almost three years ago the SCC authorized the two companies to start charging all of their customers (including the poor, of course) to build this fund. But through the end of this first report cycle, most of the money spent went to government or company overhead expenses.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

22 responses to “Four Years In, Energy Subsidy Helping Very Few”

  1. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    Here is a little lesson for those ignorant of economics. Check out that chart I used as art, from the Dominion brochure and ask yourself some questions. If that were you, would you have any incentive to conserve? Note that once the bill is established at $100 a month, you pay that even when your bill doesn’t hit that level. Why ever lower your thermostat (or raise it in summer?) If you didn’t turn on the air conditioner, or didn’t have one, wouldn’t you go get one or be tempted to change the thermostat to a cooler setting? Your bill never goes over $100 no matter what…yeah, this has all been thought through. 🙂

  2. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    Here is a little lesson for those ignorant of economics. Check out that chart I used as art, from the Dominion brochure and ask yourself some questions. If that were you, would you have any incentive to conserve? Note that once the bill is established at $100 a month, you pay that even when your bill doesn’t hit that level. Why ever lower your thermostat (or raise it in summer?) If you didn’t turn on the air conditioner, or didn’t have one, wouldn’t you go get one or be tempted to change the thermostat to a cooler setting? Your bill never goes over $100 no matter what…yeah, this has all been thought through. 🙂

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Just to point out that more than a few such arrangements exist in the real world.

      For instance, propane users are offered a similar payment option, i.e. pay so much a month based on annual usage rather than owe the next fill up in it’s entirety. Ask me how I know!

      Another is when someone signs up for a water/sewer hookup – when can be 10, 20K depending but they offer you the option of paying it out on a monthly basis.. rather than all up front.

      I note that Appalachian Power was offering that option this winter when people’s bills were skyrocketting.

      ” Does Appalachian Power have a budget plan?
      The AMP plan is calculated monthly based on the current twelve month average which fluctuates slightly. This plan recalculates each month which avoids the potential of accumulating a large settlement balance, or credit, at the anniversary month.”

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ed0867309539b42124191d22339b36adb05424174c926426921ec4509e1c5de8.png

      https://www.appalachianpower.com/account/bills/pay/amp#:~:text=The%20AMP%20plan%20is%20calculated,credit%2C%20at%20the%20anniversary%20month.

      offered to all customers, all the unsubsidized ones also.

      And of course people do this for regular purchases of cars and other expensive items… they get the principal and interest divvied up into equal monthly payments.

      heck, even the IRS will let you pay off your back taxes that way!

      called balanced billing or some such..

      Ah, but one might say, none of those are “subsidized” and THAT’s the difference!

      Yes but the “economics” of it play the same – once someone goes to a fixed monthly payment, the opportunity to work to reduce it is more complicated.

      So I agree that there needs to be a way added to this to incentivize conservation and reducing usage – which will be higher bills…..

      Which is also economics.

      Go look to the states that have high electricity rates and then compare usage. There IS a correlation between higher cost and reduced consumption!

      And there ARE ways for MOST folks to take simple and lower costs steps to reduce consumption – like zone heat/cooling and smart thermostats – as well as more expensive ways that could work something like those water/sewer hookup costs…

      They sell solar panels that way BTW – you buy the panels and the reduction in grid electricity use pays for them.

      so maybe the nut of the issue for some is should we be subsidizing electricity for some folks – REGARDLESS of how the billilng works, right?

      I don’t know how wind/solar got involved in this issue but these days, when conservatives have a complaint – it often expands into a bunch of “connected” issues – in their mind…

      the whole “socialism, help-the-poor, and do-gooderism thing is bad, bad, bad especially it means killing whales and all that..

      but hey, if you REALLY dislike govt subsidies for real, Nukes ought to really appeal to you! They make solar/wind subsidies look like pittances…

    2. how_it_works Avatar
      how_it_works

      There exists such a thing as “landlord thermostats”, which are thermostats with temperature limits, to be used when the landlord is paying the tenant’s heating and cooling bills.

      https://www.landlordthermostats.com/

      One model, for example, says:

      “The highest possible setting on this model is 72 degrees. The tenants cannot set the heat higher than 72 degrees, also the AC cannot be set lower than 72 degrees.”

      I’ve noticed, anecdotally, that some people who aren’t paying for the energy bills like to have the heating setpoint higher than the cooling setpoint. I don’t know if they’re just intentionally wasting other people’s money or just have a unique temperature preference…

      …myself, I pay my own energy bills and I usually have the heating setpoint at 68F during the day and 65F at night and the cooling setpoint at 72F overnight and 77F during the day.

    3. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Just to point out that more than a few such arrangements exist in the real world.

      For instance, propane users are offered a similar payment option, i.e. pay so much a month based on annual usage rather than owe the next fill up in it’s entirety. Ask me how I know!

      Another is when someone signs up for a water/sewer hookup – when can be 10, 20K depending but they offer you the option of paying it out on a monthly basis.. rather than all up front.

      I note that Appalachian Power was offering that option this winter when people’s bills were skyrocketting.

      ” Does Appalachian Power have a budget plan?
      The AMP plan is calculated monthly based on the current twelve month average which fluctuates slightly. This plan recalculates each month which avoids the potential of accumulating a large settlement balance, or credit, at the anniversary month.”

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ed0867309539b42124191d22339b36adb05424174c926426921ec4509e1c5de8.png

      https://www.appalachianpower.com/account/bills/pay/amp#:~:text=The%20AMP%20plan%20is%20calculated,credit%2C%20at%20the%20anniversary%20month.

      offered to all customers, all the unsubsidized ones also.

      And of course people do this for regular purchases of cars and other expensive items… they get the principal and interest divvied up into equal monthly payments.

      heck, even the IRS will let you pay off your back taxes that way!

      called balanced billing or some such..

      Ah, but one might say, none of those are “subsidized” and THAT’s the difference!

      Yes but the “economics” of it play the same – once someone goes to a fixed monthly payment, the opportunity to work to reduce it is more complicated.

      So I agree that there needs to be a way added to this to incentivize conservation and reducing usage – which will be higher bills…..

      Which is also economics.

      Go look to the states that have high electricity rates and then compare usage. There IS a correlation between higher cost and reduced consumption!

      And there ARE ways for MOST folks to take simple and lower costs steps to reduce consumption – like zone heat/cooling and smart thermostats – as well as more expensive ways that could work something like those water/sewer hookup costs…

      They sell solar panels that way BTW – you buy the panels and the reduction in grid electricity use pays for them.

      so maybe the nut of the issue for some is should we be subsidizing electricity for some folks – REGARDLESS of how the billilng works, right?

      I don’t know how wind/solar got involved in this issue but these days, when conservatives have a complaint – it often expands into a bunch of “connected” issues – in their mind…

      the whole “socialism, help-the-poor, and do-gooderism thing is bad, bad, bad especially it means killing whales and all that..

      but hey, if you REALLY dislike govt subsidies for real, Nukes ought to really appeal to you! They make solar/wind subsidies look like pittances…

    4. William O'Keefe Avatar
      William O’Keefe

      This is just another Bootlegger and Baptist scheme. It also reminds me of Thomas Sowell’s observation that the first law of economics is scarcity while the first law of politics is to forget or ignore the first law of economics.
      I also wonder how our GA will reconcile the growing need for energy associated with investments in data centers to support advances in computer technology like AI and its nutty net zero goal?

    5. how_it_works Avatar
      how_it_works

      There exists such a thing as “landlord thermostats”, which are thermostats with temperature limits, to be used when the landlord is paying the tenant’s heating and cooling bills.

      https://www.landlordthermostats.com/

      One model, for example, says:

      “The highest possible setting on this model is 72 degrees. The tenants cannot set the heat higher than 72 degrees, also the AC cannot be set lower than 72 degrees.”

      I’ve noticed, anecdotally, that some people who aren’t paying for the energy bills like to have the heating setpoint higher than the cooling setpoint. I don’t know if they’re just intentionally wasting other people’s money or just have a unique temperature preference…

      …myself, I pay my own energy bills and I usually have the heating setpoint at 68F during the day and 65F at night and the cooling setpoint at 72F overnight and 77F during the day.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        An easy thing to do is to use thermostats that reduce heat/cool when no one is there like during the day when they are at work.

        We have an ecobee , have had it for years and it does a pretty good job … and yep, we got it from REC and they can control it – we can override – and do sometimes.

        I would think such an arrangement would be mandatory for anyone who is being subsidized.

        1. Stephen Haner Avatar
          Stephen Haner

          In the world Larry’s friends are building, the government will run your thermostat. The smart meters already allow that.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            That same “govt” runs your roads, water/sewer, building codes, etc… and you guys have trouble dealing with it sometimes…. Why are there water restrictors on faucets? Why do you have to stop at a stop light? why do appliances have to meet energy standards? It’s Steve’s “world” also, right? Why, I bet EVEN YOU support the govt getting lead out of gasoline and restricting pollution if near your home!

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            The “smart” meters do allow that – on a voluntary basis.

            But what I said and perhaps not well enough for you to understand was that in situations where people ARE receiving subsidies, I WOULD SUPPORT some govt involvement on their energy use – something I thought you’d be onboard with!

  3. Can I possibly understand this correctly? Social Services is budgeted to spend $5.5 million administering a program, and Dominion is spending $1.5 million to administer the program, and the program is dispensing $800,000 a year? How is that not a major campaign issue? That is utterly insane.

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Well, in fairness, by a year from now there shoukd be many more enrolled. But it has been embarrassingly slow.

    2. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Well, in fairness, by a year from now there shoukd be many more enrolled. But it has been embarrassingly slow.

    3. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Well, in fairness, by a year from now there should be many more enrolled. But it has been embarrassingly slow.

  4. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    Because virtue signaling with wind and solar wasn’t enough…
    Could our “betters” please just let Dominion try producing energy efficiently (hint, nuclear, needed for AI and server farms, not really for EVs, which nobody wants)?

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      “Because virtue signaling with wind and solar wasn’t enough…”

      Look how Texas is virtue signaling… those Marxists! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/462334262466e15f14daded8ba305a2798783746004d248a9b8e351befd79d04.jpg

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Good Lord! Gotta be “fake news”! How could such a thing happen? Deep State! Abbot has failed to eradicate the virtue signalers that are embedded in the state’s energy agencies!

      2. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Suspect. Mixed tense. Damned STEM education.

      3. walter smith Avatar
        walter smith

        Which is why the Texas grid i s no longer reliable

  5. William Chambliss Avatar
    William Chambliss

    I always thought it was strange that the GA would decide that the off-shore wind project was “in the public interest,” yet exempt a substantial segment of the public from paying for it….

  6. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    Seriously, people. Virtue signaling does have a cost. Reality is going to happen…looks like sooner rather than later.
    Please drop all the fake science Green Nude Eel grift, quit killing the whales and birds, quit the child cobalt mining, the power outages will kill people, as will the unnecessary increased costs.
    AI and server farms need LOTS of energy. Why are the brains behind server farms looking into modular nuclear?
    Read this article and get in the real world – https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-energy-transition-wont-happen

Leave a Reply