Californians’ Electricity Costs Up 50% Since 2019: PG&E, SCE, and the State’s Energy Crisis Explained

When Tom Steyer launched his California gubernatorial campaign last month with a blunt declaration that “Big energy companies really piss me off,” the message resonated far beyond Sacramento’s polished corridors. It struck a nerve in living rooms from Eureka to El Centro, where families have watched their monthly electric bills creep upward relentlessly since 2019. Now, as Steyer pours $120 million of his own fortune into the race and PG&E counters with a nearly $10 million political action committee aimed at stopping him, the battle over California’s energy future has escalated into a defining clash of the 2026 election cycle—one that could reshape how millions pay for power, from the fog-kissed streets of San Francisco to the sun-baked suburbs of the Inland Empire.

The core of Steyer’s argument, laid out plainly on his campaign website and echoed in his latest ad spots, is straightforward: California’s three major investor-owned utilities—PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric—have operated as de facto monopolies for too long, reaping record profits while passing ever-higher costs onto captive ratepayers. Since 2019, electricity prices across the state have surged more than 50 percent, vastly outpacing inflation and leaving Californians with some of the highest residential rates in the continental United States. Steyer contends this isn’t accidental but structural: utility profits are tied to spending on infrastructure rather than performance or efficiency, creating a perverse incentive to build more—whether needed or not—while doing little to curb actual bills. His solution? Break the monopolistic control, introduce real competition, and reset the system to prioritize affordability, wildfire resilience, and a 25 percent cut in electric rates.

PG&E’s response, revealed in campaign finance disclosures filed just this week, underscores how seriously the state’s largest utility takes the threat. By funneling close to $10 million into the “Californians for Resilient and Affordable Energy” PAC—supported likewise by the California Electric Utility Industry Labor Management Cooperation Committee and IBEW Local 1245, which represents roughly 30,000 utility workers across California and Nevada—the company is attempting to frame Steyer’s proposals as risky experiments that could jeopardize grid reliability and union jobs. The ads, while avoiding direct mention of PG&E in their visuals, carry disclosures tying the utility to attacks on Steyer’s wealth and his stance on Proposition 13 reforms. It’s a classic move in the utility playbook: deploy deep pockets to shape the narrative when regulatory reform looms on the horizon.

For residents of the Bay Area, where PG&E’s infrastructure is woven into the fabric of daily life, the stakes sense particularly immediate. Think about the last time you walked through Golden Gate Park and noticed crews upgrading substations near Stow Lake, or smelled the faint ozone tang after a transformer hummed to life along the Great Highway during a summer fog burn-off. These moments are reminders of the vast, aging network that delivers power to over 16 million Californians—a system Steyer argues is optimized for shareholder returns, not public decent. His vision of a “distributed, competitive, and resilient energy system” would shift focus toward localized microgrids, battery storage paired with rooftop solar, and performance-based regulation that rewards utilities for lowering outages and emissions, not just for laying more cable or upgrading substations whether they’re needed in the Novato hills or the Salinas Valley.

The second-order effects of this fight extend well beyond the electric meter. High energy costs disproportionately strain household budgets, forcing hard trade-offs between keeping the lights on and putting food on the table—a reality acutely felt in communities like Oakland’s Fruitvale district or San Jose’s East Side, where median incomes lag behind the regional average. If Steyer’s plan to cut rates by 25 percent succeeds, it could free up hundreds of dollars annually for struggling families, potentially reducing energy insecurity and allowing more investment in home efficiency upgrades or electric vehicle adoption. Conversely, if PG&E’s campaign successfully paints reform as dangerous, it may entrench the status quo for another decade, delaying the transition to a cleaner, more adaptive grid just as climate pressures mount.

Given my background in analyzing how systemic shifts in infrastructure and regulation trickle down to neighborhood-level impacts, if this energy policy debate is affecting your household budget or business operations in the San Francisco Bay Area, here are three types of local professionals worth consulting:

• Energy Efficiency Auditors Specializing in Retrofits: Look for contractors certified by Build It Green or holding Home Energy Professional (HEP) credentials who conduct comprehensive blower door tests and thermal imaging surveys. Prioritize those who provide itemized reports linking specific upgrades—like attic insulation or duct sealing—to projected savings on your PG&E bill, and who understand California’s Title 24 standards and available DAC-SASH or MASH program incentives.
• Solar + Storage Integrators with Microgrid Expertise: Seek firms licensed by the CSLB (C-46 solar, C-10 electrical) that have installed island-capable systems with lithium-ion or lithium-iron-phosphate batteries. The best providers will demonstrate experience designing systems that can operate independently during PG&E Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS), particularly using platforms like Tesla Powerwall or Enphase IQ Battery, and will help you navigate SGIP rebates and NEM 3.0 interconnection rules.
• Utility Rate Analysts and Energy Brokers: Engage independent consultants (not tied to any specific supplier) who specialize in deciphering PG&E’s complex tariff schedules—like E-TOU-C or EV2-A—and can model savings from time-of-use shifting, demand response programs, or participation in Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) alternatives such as Peninsula Clean Energy or Silicon Valley Power. Verify their track record in reducing actual kilowatt-hour costs for similar residential or small commercial clients.

Ready to find trusted professionals? Browse our complete directory of top-rated experts in the San Francisco Bay Area area today.