SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Second_Titan who wrote (81262)12/10/2000 9:15:09 PM
From: Douglas V. Fant  Read Replies (1) of 95453
 
Quehubo007, So the blame game begins. A buddhist monk once said to me that "It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness." In that vein, a better idea would be to draft a rational statewide energy policy in California rather than pointing fingers.....Redesigning Cal ISO will accomplish essentially "zero"- just motion without progress.

Cal ISO should have notified Mssr. Davis of the FERC petition. But if the Pacific Northwest consumers will pay $500/megawatt hour, should Cal ISO stand idly by and let the State and its industry plunge into darkness?

The $250 cap was put into place by Mssr Davis in order that Mssr. Davis would look "effective" to voters in dealing with the energy situation. Problem is, the price is not realistic when markets prices rise.

You can't have it both ways, cut out basic industries and still expect a high standard of living....Again which is most important to California's citizens?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News