Green Guerrillas Against Greenwash

Description

PG$E's energy is NOT green. Check out the Facts:

• PG&E owns 0% solar energy. (See pg.2 of PDF printout from PG&E's site, or - if the page hasn't moved - Scroll to the bottom of this page)
  
  
• PG&E uses a mere 2% wind.
  

• PG&E is a fossil fuel (45%) and nuclear (24%) energy company. (See pg.2 of PDF printout from PG&E's site, or - if the page hasn't moved - Scroll to the bottom of this page)

• Feasability studies find the Bay Area has solar and wind capacity to meet 50% of San Francisco's energy by 2017...without raising customer costs.

• PG&E aims to increase its renewable energy by the legally mandated minimum of 1% a year. It does this by outsourcing it. (See this.)
  

• PG&E's $4.9 billion budget for generation and distribution does not include a single dollar for solar or wind. This is true for its 4-yr plan through 2010. You can run a search for 'solar' and 'wind' and 'renewable' and get a total of less than 10 results. Then run a search for 'nuclear' and see how many times it is mentioned in the document. (Long document, we recommend searching by keywords - 'solar', 'wind', 'nuclear', '4.9' See: General Rate Case, CPUC Proceeding A0512002)

• PG&E praises itself for its work on energy efficiency & giving out efficient lightbulbs - when all of that is legally required and funded by our tax money (see: Public Goods Charge on your monthly bill).

• PG&E endorsed climate change legislation because compared to future presidents, Bush is likely be more "sensitive to the needs of business," explains PG&E CEO Peter Darbee. (See pg. 2 of New York Times article, 1/19/07)

• PG&E is aggressively lobbying for nuclear energy to be the 'green' solution to climate change, despite the fact that there is no safe solution in sight for the nuclear waste it leaves behind for 240,000 years. (See pg. 108 the $800,000 bill you're being charged to fund the nuclear lobbying association General Rate Case)