A number of people have questioned whether or not the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA) actually gets its power from the green sources that it claims to: solar, wind, and hydroelectric. They also suggest that OCPA forces consumers onto their most expensive 100% Renewable rate plan. In short, an assertion that OCPA is less than transparent and that it is taking advantage of consumers. A little research can clearly debunk these assertions.
Let’s take the rate plan issue first. When a city opts in to use OCPA that city has a choice what rate will be the default rate for their constituents. When Huntington Beach, where I live, opted in, the default plan was Smart Choice – OCPA’s mid-tier offering. An offering that, at that time was actually less expensive than SCE’s standard rate. And, importantly, every subscriber could choose to either accept the default plan, or to choose any of the three plans that OCPA offered: Basic Choice, Smart Choice, or 100% Renewable. In fact, each subscriber could even choose to opt out of OCPA altogether and stay with SCE. So, the choice of plan is 100% in the hands of each individual subscriber. This information was communicated to all ratepayers in every bill for about three months prior to the transition, along with a simple web site where each user could record their choice. So, if each city chooses what they want to be the default rate plan, and each ratepayer can easily override that decision and pick any plan they want, doesn’t it seem ludicrous to claim that OCPA is forcing all users onto the most expensive plan?
Now on the topic of transparency, here is a chart showing OCPA’s current rate plan information:
Note that the chart clearly states that the OCPA rates shown are for generation only and also show what percentage of that generation is renewable. The chart also clearly states that the user will also be charged for the SCE delivery rate as well as surcharges, both of which are clearly shown. The chart even gives a comparison example of what an actual 523kWh bill would be for each of the three plans. Looks pretty transparent to me.
You can also get a similar rate comparison directly from SCE.
The numbers that SCE uses are exactly the same as the ones OCPA uses, including the percentages of green energy in each OCPA offering. But there’s one striking difference. Do you know what isn’t in the SCE chart? The percentage of green energy in SCE’s offering.
A review of the SCE website also fails to find any detailed information about any green energy suppliers to SCE. There’s a Powerpoint presentation on hydro-electric generation, but nothing on what percentage of SCE power it supplies. Rather, the section on green energy is entirely about how each consumer can be more efficient and green – not SCE. However, if you do a detailed search on the SCE website, you can find an archived 2024 Power Content Label that shows a maximum of 5% of any SCE power plan is provided by hydroelectric power. But no Power Content Label from 2025.
Compare that with the following chart easily accessible from the OCPA website which details what generation sources account for what percentages of power generation delivered under each different OCPA rate plan. Not only that, but the chart also details the carbon footprint per MWh of each plan.
Note that the chart also includes the link to the state’s power source disclosure program – the state program that sets the rules for creating the Power Content Label shown above.
So, who is really lacking in transparency here? OCPA or SCE? OCPA has the more current Power Content Label on its web site and it covers all of their rate plans. SCE buries a two-year old Power Content Label in their document archives. OCPA directs you to the state’s Energy Commission and its Power Content Disclosure program where you can look up any utility’s Power Content Labels, including both OCPA’s and SCE’s. Who’s making it easy for consumers to get the information on energy generation sources, and who’s making consumers jump through hoops to get that data? I think that answer is pretty clear.
And if I, as a consumer, choose to pay a few dollars more every month on my electric bill in order to have cleaner air, slow climate change, and improve the health of my neighbors shouldn’t people be thanking me for caring about the people and the planet, rather than attacking the company that made that possible?
David Rynerson is a retired voice and data network systems engineer with a background in economics. He resides in Huntington Beach.
Opinions expressed in community opinion pieces belong to the authors and not Voice of OC.
Voice of OC is interested in hearing different perspectives and voices. If you want to weigh in on this issue or others please email opinions@voiceofoc.org.
For a different view on this issue, consider:
