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.
Pastimes : The California Energy Crisis - Information & Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Raymond Duray who wrote (515)6/14/2001 12:01:24 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1715
 
And as to the notion that the State of California needs more devious trading skills??

Hmm... that's not what I said. They need more flexibility in securing power contracts. What the state has effectively done is told their traders that they are not able to buy long-term, but only on the spot market (until recently anyway). Thus, the energy sellers know that California will consistently find itself literally begging them to provide power at the spur of the moment.

Deregulation should involve restricting long-term private market contracts for power. In fact, that's what should be encouraged by deregulation. In that way all sides are operating with known quantities and future visibility with regard to their operational revenue and costs.

Relying strictly on the spot market is, in fact, a violation of free market principles.

Calling for an "end to the trading" is tantamount to calling for complete nationalization of the power infrastructure by the US or California governments. And we know how efficient governments are managing enterprises, don't we now??

If you are calling for an end to the trading, apparently you ARE begrudging producers the right to make a profit. Unless you free up the options that can be utilized on the buy side, the sell side suppliers will rape you everytime (simply because they your limitations are not theirs).

Hawk