Andy Zhang
@zhangstaz.bsky.social
Working on building electrification, energy efficiency, and climate at the Public Advocates Office in the California Public Utilities Commission. Opinions are my own.
Beginning to. But no, no hard policy has been set yet. There’s a program to incentivize all-electric rebuild after wildfire
December 12, 2025 at 8:25 PM
Beginning to. But no, no hard policy has been set yet. There’s a program to incentivize all-electric rebuild after wildfire
Only if you think of investors as a nebulous cloud of people making investment decisions. If you are a gas corporation with captive gas customers it literally doesn't matter. They want to build the gas line b/c they earn a guaranteed ROR. Someone has to say no.
December 12, 2025 at 7:13 PM
Only if you think of investors as a nebulous cloud of people making investment decisions. If you are a gas corporation with captive gas customers it literally doesn't matter. They want to build the gas line b/c they earn a guaranteed ROR. Someone has to say no.
Yes, but ending gas service is a comprehensive approach. You can literally take a section of a distribution line and work with people there to end service in an equitable way.
December 12, 2025 at 7:09 PM
Yes, but ending gas service is a comprehensive approach. You can literally take a section of a distribution line and work with people there to end service in an equitable way.
Let me quote Michael for you. "Any mechanisms supporting asset investment needs to focus on the point when assets are reaching their end of life and need to be replaced anyway."
And I presented how that is done w/ restricting gas infrastructure buildout.
And I presented how that is done w/ restricting gas infrastructure buildout.
December 12, 2025 at 7:08 PM
Let me quote Michael for you. "Any mechanisms supporting asset investment needs to focus on the point when assets are reaching their end of life and need to be replaced anyway."
And I presented how that is done w/ restricting gas infrastructure buildout.
And I presented how that is done w/ restricting gas infrastructure buildout.
Put it in better words than I can. Mechanically, this is the correct take.
December 12, 2025 at 7:05 PM
Put it in better words than I can. Mechanically, this is the correct take.
Reposted by Andy Zhang
I think the point is that you don’t achieve that full transition without actively planning to shut down the gas infrastructure.
You can’t do it with marginal subsidy shifts alone.
That’s an example of why supply side restrictions and planning matter, in addition to buildout.
You can’t do it with marginal subsidy shifts alone.
That’s an example of why supply side restrictions and planning matter, in addition to buildout.
December 12, 2025 at 7:04 PM
I think the point is that you don’t achieve that full transition without actively planning to shut down the gas infrastructure.
You can’t do it with marginal subsidy shifts alone.
That’s an example of why supply side restrictions and planning matter, in addition to buildout.
You can’t do it with marginal subsidy shifts alone.
That’s an example of why supply side restrictions and planning matter, in addition to buildout.
Ok. Who switches them? How long does it take? What if the costs to switch far exceed the fuel subsidy? It's the actual fixed infrastructure on the gas side which has the bulk of the cost. If you end gas service for those communities that is much more comprehensive approach than a random program
December 12, 2025 at 7:04 PM
Ok. Who switches them? How long does it take? What if the costs to switch far exceed the fuel subsidy? It's the actual fixed infrastructure on the gas side which has the bulk of the cost. If you end gas service for those communities that is much more comprehensive approach than a random program
Take California's income-qualified fuel discounts. You could end it for gas, but how do you do that without ending gas service and moving them to all-electric? You can't leave all those lower-income customers stranded. Ending gas service lets you have reallocatable investment dollars for this.
December 12, 2025 at 6:53 PM
Take California's income-qualified fuel discounts. You could end it for gas, but how do you do that without ending gas service and moving them to all-electric? You can't leave all those lower-income customers stranded. Ending gas service lets you have reallocatable investment dollars for this.
Frankly, that's all conjecture. The mechanics of making that happen,are what I deal with on a regular basis. I've read Michael's article (pt2) where he presents solutions. Half of those, like shifting green levies, ending cash subsidies for fossil fuels, etc, probably cannot happen w/o restrictions
December 12, 2025 at 6:43 PM
Frankly, that's all conjecture. The mechanics of making that happen,are what I deal with on a regular basis. I've read Michael's article (pt2) where he presents solutions. Half of those, like shifting green levies, ending cash subsidies for fossil fuels, etc, probably cannot happen w/o restrictions
A real example I'm working with is ending new gas distribution line investment. A 65-yr useful life for that. Even if the electrotech revolution wins in the end, you still need to go to those people's homes (say in 10 yrs) and tell them they can no longer use gas (or price them out).
December 12, 2025 at 6:33 PM
A real example I'm working with is ending new gas distribution line investment. A 65-yr useful life for that. Even if the electrotech revolution wins in the end, you still need to go to those people's homes (say in 10 yrs) and tell them they can no longer use gas (or price them out).
I actually agree with Michael on most things. It's just that the physics of climate change necessary means fossil fuel restrictions. There is simply no way around it.
December 12, 2025 at 6:27 PM
I actually agree with Michael on most things. It's just that the physics of climate change necessary means fossil fuel restrictions. There is simply no way around it.
And everything else? Private flights, animal agriculture, etc? No matter how much cheaper electrified stuff is, there is still a substantial # of people who will hold on to fossil fuel stuff for emotional reasons. Unless you price out like 99% of people, which is basically a restriction anyways.
December 12, 2025 at 6:24 PM
And everything else? Private flights, animal agriculture, etc? No matter how much cheaper electrified stuff is, there is still a substantial # of people who will hold on to fossil fuel stuff for emotional reasons. Unless you price out like 99% of people, which is basically a restriction anyways.
Nobody has explained how growing renewables exponentially naturally leads to fossil fuels not being burned. The only thing that matters is actual GHG molecules in the atmosphere, not X amt of energy produced by renewables. What if some rich people don't care and still want their gas stoves, etc?
December 12, 2025 at 6:20 PM
Nobody has explained how growing renewables exponentially naturally leads to fossil fuels not being burned. The only thing that matters is actual GHG molecules in the atmosphere, not X amt of energy produced by renewables. What if some rich people don't care and still want their gas stoves, etc?
Most of these technologies are sold as a fix to a failure of the grid, when you can just fix the grid in the first place. We shouldn’t give up on the vision of the grid as affordable, reliable, and efficient. It is actually possible, contrary to popular belief.
December 9, 2025 at 3:47 PM
Most of these technologies are sold as a fix to a failure of the grid, when you can just fix the grid in the first place. We shouldn’t give up on the vision of the grid as affordable, reliable, and efficient. It is actually possible, contrary to popular belief.
Wouldn't surprise me if most infrastructure spending going forward is climate-related. Looking at my area of expertise, most of the electric rate increases in CA are directly attributable to wildfire spending.
October 22, 2025 at 6:06 AM
Wouldn't surprise me if most infrastructure spending going forward is climate-related. Looking at my area of expertise, most of the electric rate increases in CA are directly attributable to wildfire spending.
When all those bad real estate loans to climate-vulnerable spots (cough Miami) inevitably happens, the Fed is gonna say they never saw it coming
October 16, 2025 at 7:30 PM
When all those bad real estate loans to climate-vulnerable spots (cough Miami) inevitably happens, the Fed is gonna say they never saw it coming
Reposted by Andy Zhang
This isn’t actually a thread of different posts. It’s all just different cultivars of a single post
October 7, 2025 at 1:10 AM
This isn’t actually a thread of different posts. It’s all just different cultivars of a single post
Feels like if we're literally gonna just prop them up w/ state money, might as well go with the original proposal and buy the refineries. It'll be selling for pennies on the dollar anyways.
September 13, 2025 at 4:04 AM
Feels like if we're literally gonna just prop them up w/ state money, might as well go with the original proposal and buy the refineries. It'll be selling for pennies on the dollar anyways.
Not 100% sure but I thought SA had some of the lowest production costs in the world. In any case, what happens is anybody’s guess. Doesn’t seem like anyone is planning for anything except “drill baby drill”
June 23, 2025 at 7:59 PM
Not 100% sure but I thought SA had some of the lowest production costs in the world. In any case, what happens is anybody’s guess. Doesn’t seem like anyone is planning for anything except “drill baby drill”
Unless oil stays at like $15/bbl, why would Aramco/Rosneft/Statoil turn off their money printers. It’s like having an atm in your living room.
June 23, 2025 at 7:36 PM
Unless oil stays at like $15/bbl, why would Aramco/Rosneft/Statoil turn off their money printers. It’s like having an atm in your living room.
Waiting for the day state-owned fossil goo companies actually reduce production to meet their climate “goals”
June 23, 2025 at 7:25 PM
Waiting for the day state-owned fossil goo companies actually reduce production to meet their climate “goals”
Sounds like capital markets are functioning and capital allocation is spot on these days. :)
May 28, 2025 at 4:35 AM
Sounds like capital markets are functioning and capital allocation is spot on these days. :)