We don't need PG&E. The sun gives us free energy, and batteries + thermal energy storage can cover the cloudiest of days.
Well-designed suburbs don't need to be subsidized. And they can also be healthier and happier for you and your family (quiet, safe, better air quality, elbow-room, &etc). Just decentralize large cities by building smaller mixed-use "downtowns" surrounded by layers of variable density housing. Single family homes with yards are a part of that.
I'm moving and will be putting this into practice, instead of sitting back and seeing what happens. My cost of living will go down even though I am self-providing all of my family's utilities.
I might even use the savings to build more than just my own needs... creating opportunities for those with less capital to make the same choice to enjoy a better life at an affordable cost.
P.S. I have done the carbon calculations, and burying it in concrete is a good part of a total solution. "Deluding." Hah. A head not in the sand can more easily look in the mirror!
US suburbs are heavily subsidized with federal dollars[1], this is a huge reason why PGE can't effectively maintain the infrastructure in California. The ratepayers & tax base cannot afford to repipe a suburban neighborhood when the water service lines hit end of design life, let alone repaving, maintaining gas, electrical service, telecom & cable[2]. This is also why Fiber buildouts are so uncommon in suburbs (for-profit companies won't make their money back within a decade).
We have designed an extremely expensive mousetrap of suburbia where you get degrading public services (as maintenance & replacement bills accrue and go unmet), nearly mandatory car ownership, and higher rates of health problems caused by the poor design of these neighborhoods[3].
1 - https://www.theamericanconservative.com/urbs/we-have-always-...
2 - https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/27/a-texas-sized-...
3 - https://www.webmd.com/women/news/20040927/suburbs-may-be-haz...