OT, "Re: Rhetorical question do you see the Ca. problem in any of the other 50 states? The non-rhetorical answer is that many industry observers see a great possibility for brown-outs and black-outs in NYC this summer due to transmission constraints."
But this is not happening because they froze the billing rate, and dismembered the delivery infrastructure. It is happening because of poor anticipation and planning.
"Let me say first of all, that you are mistaken if you think the general public in California had anything whatsoever to do with the current mess that deregulation has created."
It was dumb to let it happen, it is even dummer to let it continue. I can still see the steps of the state offices in Sacramento. Surely the high cost of power in SD inspired somebody to promise what can not be delivered. SD has had the highest US power costs for decades, I was never clear why that was. Be sure to show the Sierra Club political contributions when you talk pay offs.
"Re: FERC does not have a dog in this fight. But, it does have a beef, from the Abrams' speech: Over the past two weeks, for example, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ordered power companies to rebate some $124 million to California utilities. There is a great deal of disinformation surrounding this as you know, but somehow the FERC came up with an arbitrary figure of $273/Mwh as the tipping point for fair gain vs. windfall profit. This is, of course, about 800% of the going rate for power in December, 1999 ($32/Mwh). As a consumer, I'm a little taken aback that FERC allowed that a 799% price rise within one year was within the purview of fair compensation. "
The eye opener was how many new stations applied and were turned down. One was stopped my a mayor on a hunger strike.
Careful now, you are comparing the mean rate with the peak rate in your example. Chief exec's. testified the mean rate for four of the Ca biggest was about $35/Mwh just before the breakup. Brown was trying the same errant comparison during the hearings, and they let her get away with it. When they are short on supply they are making the last increment of power on the least efficient generator, and probably transporting it from a very longest distance over outdated hardware, maybe at the limit of some transmission nodes. I also give you that Ca. law made those generators independent, but now they think they should not charge what the market will bear. Ca. wants just the up side of competition without the downside. What is that, a half assed utility structure?? A $124MM refund is a yellow hole in their snow bank, and was a small peak block of power.
"California energy consumers is aware of the impact of peak shaving" What do you mean, they have their face shaved long before they get to the office! And they shave before they get on the ski lift. No really, it is a one time increment in capacity for a serious long term issue. The Ca citizenry need to get after this, yank the Gov. if they have to. The first hard fixes (single cycle GTs') normally have 18-24 month construction times, I suppose 9 months in a crunch. add the second cycle in the remaining 18 months. (This is very expensive power by the way.) But the environmental permit takes more like two or three years, that is purely a government constrained issue, both Fed and State.
The bottom line is Ca. has not added capacity for 12 years, and they are still not doing anything to change that. Force environmental and site permits for the four units that were refused!
I offer a slightly modified Texas or La. phase they kept throwing into my yankee face in the 70's. This summer "let the dummies sweat in the dark" until they change their ways and/or government. Winter is a whole 'nother issue, people can die in cold homes in the higher elevations. Missing traffic lights will get somebody killed. Over time a fully deployed system will degrade without scheduled maintenance outages. It is only a matter of time ....tick....tick....tick.
Make sure those politicians have to touch those cold bodies!
PS see if you can also hear the 8 speakers who addressed the chamber the day after the Abraham spoke.
The natural gas supply issue is pretty serious as well, and has much more far reaching implications. There are only two LNG ports working in the US, they need about $3.50/mscf of justify operations. The nearest to Ca. is Lake Charles, La. |
