it raises questions about how the state will achieve its affordability, decarbonization and reliability objectives with the increased customer choice that is occurring in the electric market, both because of community choice aggregators and because of customers choosing to install solar on their homes or adding storage. it raises fears that customers making those choices will compromise the goals of decarbonization reliability and affordability and it says there is no plan to mitigating the fears that outcomes -- the feared outcomes it raises. it offers no solutions and flags the need for, in their view, unspecified regulatory and legislative khaifjt as you know, c.c.a.s are contributing to these three objectives. c.c.a.s must and do comply with state law, regarding resource adequacy. and that takes care of some of the reliability concerns that are being raised. c.c.a.s are supporting the construction of billions of dollars of renewable energy projects and it's at a pace that's faster than required by current state law to meet the decarbonization objectives. for example, clean power s.f

raises questions about how the state will achieve its affordability, decarbonization and reliability objectives with the increased choice that is occurring in the electric market, and specifically, it raises fears that customers choosing to take service from c.c.a.s and customers choosing to generate their own power, like through rooftop solar, are going to compromise these objectives of affordability, reliability, and decarbonization. says there's no plan for mitigating the outcomes. does not discuss how the role of the california p.u.c. itself could or should change in the face of the changes that they are anticipating, and offers no solutions. flagging the need for unspecified regulatory and legislative change. the california p.u.c. set a deadline for comment of june 11th on that report. and they scheduled a legislative style hearing, referred to them, for june 22nd. you can anticipate that will be very active, both in sacramento and here at the california p.u.c. helping to shape the outcome of the dialogue that the california p.u.c. has opened. with that, i'll take any questions

it raises fears that customers making those choices will compromise the goals of decarbonization reliabilitynd affdability and it says there is o plan to mitigating the fears that outcomes -- the feared outcomes it raises. it of o solutions and flags the need for, in their view, unspecified regulatory and legislative khaifjt as you know, c.c.a.s are contributing to these three objectives. c.c.a.s must and do comply with state law, regarding resource adequacy. and that takes care of some of the reliability concerns that are being raised. c.c.a.s are supporting the construction of billions of dollars of renewable energy projects and it's at a pace that's faster than required by current state law to meet the decarbonization objectives. for example, clean power s.f. just -- you know, our program has assigned 847 megawatts wit contracts with solar and wind facilities here in california to serve our customers and c.c.a. rates ow than i.o.u. rates and the bottom line bills to customers are comparable. the cpuc has set a deadline for comments of june 11. that was yesterday. we commented on our own a

the report raises questions about how the state will achieve -achieve -- its affordad decarbonization and reliability objectives as increased customer choice is occurring within the electricity market. and i think specifically that the report raises fears that c.c.a. and customers choosing to generate their own electricity, say, with rooftop solar, may compromise these goals. so the -- the report is raising an alarm. it says also that there is no plan for mitigating these outcomes from the cpuc. and the report offers no solutions and it instead flags the need for unspecified regulatory and legislative change. and so i think that as you all know through reports that we have provided here previously that to reinforce that c.c.a.s are contributing to the three objectives identified in the report. and c.c.a.s must and do comply with state law requiring resource adequacy and that's a requirement to support grid reliability. and c.c.a.s are supporting the construction of billions of dollars of new renewable energy projects in california at a pace faster than required by current state law to

customers choosing to take the difference steps compromises the goals that i just mentioned, decarbonization, reliability, affordability. in the face of raising the fears, it's also saying that they have no plan for addressing the fears that they're raising and it offers no solutions, basically flags the need for unspecified regulatory or regulated changes. so the p.u.c. held a legislative-style hearing on friday, june 22. we were invited for our perspective as an operating c.c.a. and a member of the community choice coalition, trade association, c.c.a. san francisco was invited specifically to participate on the affordability panel. in that setting, we addressed three key areas that c.c.a. service is affordable, as affordable as the for-prof for-profit utility, and accountable, transparent and that c.c.a. prioritizes social equity. it was a day-long hearing. the participation we had specificallies with an hour-long panel, brief remarks, and then back-and-forth q & a with the panel members and commissioners. they concluded the hearing saying that they intend to take action on the report in s

and that happens when energy is being progressively decarbonized.hen they stabilize, energy prices go down and society uses electricity for things that were not electrified before. francine: there is no doubt in your mind this is the path the world will take? francesco: it is happening. it is happening everywhere. so let's say utilities have this lucky moment in which -- it will be a long moment -- in which their business is growing regardless because electricity becomes more and more the energy of the future. so imagine you sit in a business segment whose base volume keeps growing alone on its own. that is great. so it is a question of being conscious about it. and really pushing that. ♪ francine: coming up, the google of energy? we will talk about enel's turn to tech in search of the next big money spinner. ♪ ♪ francine: power company enel was among the first of its kind to invest heavily in renewables, and the bet paid off, making it one of the biggest green power operators in north america. but as incentives have started to dry up, the company i

and that happens when energy is being progressively decarbonized.hen that happens, energy prices go down, they stabilize, and all of a sudden, society uses electricity for things that were not electrified before. francine: and there is no doubt in your mind this is the path the world will take? francesco: it is happening. it is happening everywhere. so let's say utilities have this lucky moment in which -- it will be a long moment -- in which their business is growing regardless because electricity becomes more and more the energy of the future. so imagine you sit in a business segment whose base volume keeps growing alone on its own. that is great. so it is a question of being conscious about it. and really pushing that. ♪ francine: coming up, the google of energy? we will talk about enel's turn to tech in search of the next big money spinner. ♪ francine: power company enel was among the first of its kind to invest heavily in renewables, and the bet paid off, making it one of the biggest green power operators in north america. but as incentives hav

you know, for us i think to your question telling the business case for decarbonization, one of the mostignificant drivers for renewable energy in virginia is facebo, amazon and microsoft. those three companies are responsible for over a gigawatt investment in solar energy alone. so we are seeing tremendous progress from the corporate side and those investments are driving policy changes at the state level. so we are seeing changes within our state legislature and we just this year the governor signed a piece of legislation that paved the way for 5,000 megawatts for solar in virginia. something that probably would not have happened had we not had the investment for the corporate giants who were saying this is what we want. when customers are demanding it you will see policy movement and i think that's one of the biggest drivers we are seeing in states like virginia. >> quickly, david, because our boss is next. >> first just a very quick comment on the finance piece. i think is helpful to think in terms of orders of magnitude. we need the $10 billion plus for the green climate fund, we ne

recommended solution to avoid this shock in asset prices, and that is for the united states to begin decarbonizing to invest more in renewables, and to broaden our national energy portfolio away from this asset collapse risk and into renewable energy. the paper concludes, and i quote, an exposed country can mitigate the impact of stranding by divesting from fossil fuels as an insurance policy. end quote. and it goes to say specifically about the united states of america that, and i quote here again, the united states is worse off if it continues to promote fossil fuel production and consumption than if it moves away from them. so let me revert to the earlier economic piece that i mentioned because it concludes with very similar advice. i quote from the first aicle. if climate policies are implemented early on and in a stable and credible framework, market participants are able to smoothly anticipate the effects. in this case there would not be any large shock in asset prices, and there would be no systemic risk. in contrast, the article continues, in a scenario in which the implementation of clima