Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ken98 who wrote (47445)	12/14/2000 1:13:20 AM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Ken: It's amazing how little run the California energy crisis has gotten in the press. Their version of electrical generation "deregulation" is nothing but price controls in drag, now demonstrating what price controls do best: cause shortages. Either they come up with some sort of lame excuse for an emergency financing scheme soon, or the lights go off (not a pleasant prospect when you're running a server farm or a semiconductor fab to be sure!) Got SoCal Edison poots?

To: Ken98 who wrote (47445)	12/14/2000 1:55:34 AM
From: eddieww	Respond to of 436258

"This is what a "caring" Dem governor... Wrong. The enabling legislation for the de-reg was passed under Republican Gov Pete Wilson in 1997 and championed by Republicans in the State Legislature prompted by near-monopoly local energy suppliers. ucan.org Assembly Bill 1890. Passed in September, 1997. Section 1 (b) It is the intent of the Legislature to provide the legislative foundation for transforming the regulatory framework of California's electric industry in ways that meet the objectives stated in subdivision (a). It is the further intent of the Legislature that during a limited transition period ending March 31, 2002, to provide for all of the following . . . (2) An immediate rate reduction of no less than 10 percent for residential and small commercial ratepayers . . . (4) An anticipated result through implementation of this act of a subsequent, cumulative rate reduction for residential and small commercial customers of no less than 20 percent by April 1, 2002.

To: Ken98 who wrote (47445)	12/14/2000 2:07:47 AM
From: portage	Respond to of 436258

Ken98, the California power deregulation bill was passed a few years ago at the behest of California businesses who lobbied hard and got Republican governor Pete Wilson to sign it after a very short, unusually non-public period of debate. I barely remember it, certainly not its drastic terms, and I'm an avid newspaper reader. A democratic legislator, Steve Peace (?) of San Diego area did help carry the ball for it. I'm not sure if he was fooled into it or had a role in its germination. Some of the utilities made the mistake of agreeing to freeze rates in exchange for other benefits they received and would receive from the ploy. Many other deals were made by business users receiving favorable long term locked-in prices in exchage for accepting brownouts when supply got tight. Some are now regretting this, even though their rates are much better than the manipulated crunch time rates. The only way consumers were mollified into accepting it was by telling them they'd get a 10% temporary rollback combined with frozen rates for a set period of time. The other details given at the time were hazy and confusing, but a few years ago we were basically told that's what we had to live with. The brokers are widely suspected of gaming the system by making power blocks disappear or go out of state just when needed most, and there's little to stop them since supply and demand are so out of whack. Also, 25% of the plants were mysteriously shut down at the same time in the past week, for a variety of reasons. A sneak inspection was launched on all of them to verify reasons for the downtime, even though there was no authority to do so. That's how hot this issue is right now. Gov. Davis inherited this no-win problem. He has little authorized control over it, save for making political pleas or drastic eminent domain measures, as the FERC has authorization over the ISOs. Davis is screaming at FERC to intervene. Deregulation of a crucial need such as power prior to ensuring a steady new supply to meet worse case scenario demand increases was a huge blunder, but it was not the action of the current California government. I may not have all the details exact here, but basically this is what I've culled from the papers until my eyes glaze over and I move on to the entertainment section.