1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at info@12ozprophet.com and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum (and don't forget to follow @12ozprophet in Instagram)!

Does Energy Deregulation Still Make Sense?

Discussion in 'Channel Zero' started by mental invalid, May 17, 2002.

  1. mental invalid

    mental invalid Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined:
    May 11, 2001
    Messages:
    13,050

    Does Energy Deregulation Still Make Sense?

    Discussion started by mental invalid - May 17, 2002

    Does Energy Deregulation Still Make Sense?
    By ALEX BERENSON


    S soaring electricity prices roiled California last year, supporters of power deregulation — including Enron and the Bush administration — insisted the state's woes were not related to its newly deregulated electric market. High prices and rolling blackouts were the natural consequence of a supply shortage years in the making, they said.

    That explanation never carried much weight with the economists and engineers who watched the state's electricity market crumble. Instead, the experts said, as demand for power rose, flaws in the market's design gave suppliers incentives to worsen and even create shortages.

    Proof of such manipulation was in short supply until last week, when federal regulators released memorandums written by lawyers at Enron that offered new evidence that power producers used the crisis to gouge consumers.

    Despite its flaws, electricity deregulation, which has proceeded for more than a decade, should eventually benefit consumers, industry experts said. But the new evidence of the system's vulnerability may strengthen the position of consumer groups and others who said that tough rules and close oversight are essential if it is to work.

    "If we want generators to obey the market rules, we have to make it unprofitable for them to break the market rules," said Frank A. Wolak, an economics professor at Stanford University and chairman of the market surveillance committee at the California Independent System Operator, which runs the state's power grid.

    The memorandums released by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission show in detail how traders drove up prices in California when electricity supplies were tight, said Robert McCullough, an energy industry consultant in Portland, Ore.

    "Under the original incentives, it was in every player's interest to exacerbate an emergency," Mr. McCullough said.

    Like other deregulated electricity markets, California set prices using a reverse auction. Traders and producers offered power supplies, and an independent agency bought enough to cover the day's expected demand. The agency picked as many plants as it needed to keep the lights on, choosing the lowest bid first, then the next lowest and so on. Once it met the demand for power, the highest bid it accepted was the price that every generator received.

    But businesses and people need electricity, no matter what it costs, so demand does not vary much with price. In California, that meant that, as demand neared the limits of supply, the producers could be virtually certain that almost any offer they made would be accepted, said Richard E. Schuler, an engineering and economics professor at Cornell University. "A measure of a market's competitiveness isn't necessarily the number of suppliers," Mr. Schuler said. "It's how many suppliers risk not selling anything if their bids are too high." In California, that risk was very low.

    Making matters worse, suppliers who owned several power plants found that even on days when demand was low, they could create emergencies by keeping generators out of service, Mr. Wolak said. "What led to the meltdown in California," he said, "were generators withholding supply from the market in California, either by bidding very, very high or just turning the plants off."

    California tried to impose price caps on its market when the crisis began in 2000. The idea was to eliminate the incentive for producers to withhold supply and drive up prices. But traders simply sold power to neighboring states without caps, a strategy detailed in the Enron memos. Only when the Bush administration imposed regional price caps did the crisis ease.

    "Once the price caps went into operation, the plants actually operated more instead of less," Mr. McCullough said.

    Whether electricity markets in other states could implode as California's did remains an open question. Richard A. Rosen, a consultant who works mainly with consumer groups and state utility commissions, said the Enron memos offered more proof that electric suppliers have too much power in deregulated markets.

    "These kinds of tricks and manipulations could be done, and are probably being done to a lesser extent everywhere," he said. "These markets demand very strong monitoring and regulation, so strong that it's essentially impossible."

    But Mr. Schuler argued that California's market design had several technical weaknesses that made a crisis more likely. Over time, deregulated markets will become harder to manipulate, especially as power users learn how to lower demand quickly in response to price spikes, he said.

    Regulation, Mr. Schuler said, stifled innovation and caused high prices. "I'd rather see people put their money where their mouth is, and that's the system we have in place right now," he said.

    STILL, the Enron memos may heighten the pressure on the Bush administration to reassure New York and other states with deregulated markets that they will not see a repeat of California's problems. To do this, FERC must toughen oversight of power producers and press state regulators to allow electricity to flow between states more easily, said Paul L. Joskow, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

    "In the end, you have to have a national policy on electricity," Mr. Joskow said.
     
    mental invalid - Rank: Dirty Dozen Crew - Messages:
    13,050
    - Joined:
    May 11, 2001
  2. beardo

    beardo Guest

    beardo - Replied May 17, 2002

    stop posting articles, im trying to work here
     
  3. Are2

    Are2 Guest

    Are2 - Replied May 17, 2002

    has energy deregulation ever made sense?!
     
  4. T.T Boy

    T.T Boy Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined:
    May 18, 2001
    Messages:
    21,803

    T.T Boy - Replied May 17, 2002

    sure fucked things up bad around here.
     
    T.T Boy - Rank: Dirty Dozen Crew - Messages:
    21,803
    - Joined:
    May 18, 2001