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: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (55139)	1/7/2001 7:29:53 PM
From: flatsville	Respond to of 436258

patron-- <<State boundaries are "artificial" boundaries where electricity demand, generation and supply are concerned.>> <Not true. State regulations govern the building and operations of power plants to a much larger extent than do Federal regs....that's why California is a net power importer.> They may be a fact, but they are "artificial." Figures #1 and #8 are telling you that state boundaries are artifical. Some states are not only divided between power pools, but the three grids as well. eia.doe.gov And that's why state by state deregulation is bound to fail because the grid and pools do not "recognize" state boundaries. Only politicians and residents see this as a state issue. At the beginning of the century electricity regulation was largely a state issue because electricity was produced and used locally. Not so any more. (In 1988 the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act established regional regulation and planning. The first regional power pool, Pennsylvania-New Jersey Interconnection was created in 1927. The first trans national line between the USA and Canada, Niagara Falls, connected in 1901.) An example: My state is primarily an exporter of electricity. Yet for the past two summers we have faced the threat of power emergencies and brown-outs due to supply problems. Why? Beacuse we are connected to a grid that also serves a major SMSA in a different state. Certain independent power producers want to build plants here in my state to feed that SMSA. So far the response has been, "gfy and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out" because the residents of my state do not want to deal with the environmental effects of more plants. Is this smart? Perhaps not. I believe we import some on occasion. And when a plant goes down here the supply comes from the other state. But, the NIMBY attitude will most likely prevail. (Frankly, it's unclear to me as well why the independent generators can't build the new plants within the other state if that's where the majority of the power is headed. I think it has to do with land purchase and building costs being considerable lower here.) So, this state may well reap the fruits of its' NIMBY attitude eventhough it is net exporter. It cuts both ways.