Electric Utility Deregulation - Page 2

Az · May 4, 2003, 13:49

Well, honestly, that's just bad management. Our glorious overpaid, government monopoly which is effectively run by the trade unions is about to get Brownouts somewhere in the beginning of next year with the forecasted growth in electric output.

I am beginning more and more to think that this is a cultural thing.

Q Classic · May 4, 2003, 14:15

i dunno. in georgia, electric dereg didn't seem to bother anything, nor did phone dereg.

it was gas dereg that screwed everyone over.

MichaeltheGreat · May 4, 2003, 14:25

With Georgia (and several other states) it's a pipeline access issue, not a market issue.

PLATO · May 4, 2003, 14:29

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Plato - I worked in the midst of the Cali restructuring Scheißsturm throughout most of the 90's, doing consulting work related to strategic planning for public agencies, powerplant siting, land-use and environmental requirements for independent power producers, and a whole bunch of rate, feasibility and operations analysis. I'll post more about this later, but the "Enron collapse" had nothing to do with Cali, except perhaps their approach to the Cali market was symptomatic of their basic stupidity outside their core gas pipeline business.

More later.

I suspected as much. This article was written by the CEO of a small electrical co-operative. They operated over 3 to 4 counties. Prices are relatively low and service is reliable. They are most likely trying to sway the debate in order to maintain a no-competition environment since they have no real desire to expand their service area. Thanks for the info MTG.

Asher · May 4, 2003, 14:30

Quote:

Originally posted by St Leo
LOL. It's not working out at all in Canada.

It's already working fine in Alberta, so perhaps you should revise that.

Ontario's still in the transitionary period, historically the prices skyrocket the first year or two before settling down to normal, and then they start getting cheaper.

Starchild · May 4, 2003, 14:41

Micheal, smookie, I'm in the UK.

Excellent location of tide and wind power generation but you're right, nothing in comparision to the sheer amount of green energy the Canadians could harness.

Q Classic · May 4, 2003, 14:41

mtg, it might have been pipeline--but from what i've seen, it's a billing problem.

one guy has never gotten a bill.
another one didn't get a bill for two years, then suddenly received one to the tune of several thousand dollars.
others have received much higher bills than the amount they've used...

that just ain't right....

Ned · May 4, 2003, 14:45

Quote:

Originally posted by CerberusIV
Deregulating public utilities is a crap idea. I am trying to get a new electricity supply installed in a building at work. Before deregulation it was all Yorkshire Electricity. Now I have to deal with YEDL to run a new cable from the street to the building. They did but the new meter cabinet wasn't ready so they capped off the cable and left it. Then Npower came to fit the meter and would not because the mains cable wasn't connected to a cut-off box in the meter cabinet and our electrician hadn't done the internal wiring properly.

YEDL say that their computer shows the job has been completed so they can't come back. Everybody says it is someone else's responsibility. No-one will give a clear list of what needs to be done in what order. In the middle of all this someone else actually turned up to read the meter that hadn't been installed!

I just want to pay the money and have the work done but that concept is too difficult for these morons.

Thatcher and the idiots who privatised electricity in the UK should be hanged for their stupidity. Oh, and don't even mention the endless stream of reps calling at the door and the mountains of junk mail trying to persuade me to switch supplier. That must cost a fortune to do and the electricity user ends up paying for it in the end.

This reminds me of the complainers here in the US who still complain about the breakup of AT&T.

Sava · May 4, 2003, 14:46

The breakup of AT&T was bad... I don't understand how you can think otherwise

Agathon · May 4, 2003, 14:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher

Ontario's still in the transitionary period, historically the prices skyrocket the first year or two before settling down to normal, and then they start getting cheaper.

Yeah right. Not every Albertan is as happy as you about it.

Odin · May 4, 2003, 14:54

I was talking Gasoline prices, I don't know much about natural gas, I get my heating from a propane co-op, not a corporation.

Sava, why was the breakup of AT&T bad, it was geting too big. I think Microsoft needs to be broken up too. The reason capitalism no longer works is that the corporations have gotten to big, free market works best when there is as much compitition as posible, it spurs low prices and a good variety of products.

Q Classic · May 4, 2003, 14:58

i don't think microsoft needs to be broken up. there's still much competition to be had in the computer os market.

att being broken up was before my time, so i honestly don't know what life was like before it. (i was still <10yo at the time, so~)

Willem · May 4, 2003, 14:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher

It's already working fine in Alberta, so perhaps you should revise that.

Ontario's still in the transitionary period, historically the prices skyrocket the first year or two before settling down to normal, and then they start getting cheaper.

You didn't answer my questions. What's your rate per kilowatt hour now and how stable are the prices?

MichaeltheGreat · May 4, 2003, 14:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
The breakup of AT&T was bad... I don't understand how you can think otherwise

Uh, lower rates overall 20 years later.

MichaeltheGreat · May 4, 2003, 15:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Starchild
Micheal, smookie, I'm in the UK.

Excellent location of tide and wind power generation but you're right, nothing in comparision to the sheer amount of green energy the Canadians could harness.

I thought you were living in Canada for a while, hun. Not like the UK's a garden spot for weather, either.

Kidicious · May 4, 2003, 15:01

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

Uh, lower rates overall 20 years later.

I think it took about 10 years for rates to go down significantly though.

Willem · May 4, 2003, 15:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Q Cubed
i don't think microsoft needs to be broken up. there's still much competition to be had in the computer os market.

What competition?

All we have outside the Mac OS is Windows and Linux, which is a long way from making any serious inroads into the general consumer market. Or am I missing something?

Starchild · May 4, 2003, 15:04

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

I thought you were living in Canada for a while, hun. Not like the UK's a garden spot for weather, either.

Finished highschool in Canada and moved to England for a bit of pre-uni Sixth Form. After this, off to Scotland for university. Sometimes, I don't know why I bother unpacking.

Q Classic · May 4, 2003, 15:06

standardization among oses, i think, is a good thing. if microsoft had any brains, they'd switch to a unix-based platform, do away with that entire "monopoly" on the desktop market, and then we'd have real competition between osx, windows, and the different linux flavors.

microsoft isn't the really the king in the server market.

microsoft has a long ways to go in the gaming market, both for pc and for console.

as for office productivity, you still have productivity suites and plenty of alternatives.

when i said competition, i wasn't restricting it to only oses.

Odin · May 4, 2003, 15:13

In computers the only serious corporations are Microsoft and Apple. Microsoft uses its near-monopoly to force software companies to suck up the them, hence the court case a few years back. The near monopoly also lets Micrsoft sell Windows for rediculous prices, $150 for XP my @ss! I'd say no more than $80.

Q Classic · May 4, 2003, 15:15

windows also comes with support packs free of charge:

to move from winxp to winxp sp1 costs nothing but time.

to move from osx 10.0 to osx 10.1 to osx 10.2 is usd$160, minimum.

MichaeltheGreat · May 4, 2003, 15:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Q Cubed
mtg, it might have been pipeline--but from what i've seen, it's a billing problem.

one guy has never gotten a bill.
another one didn't get a bill for two years, then suddenly received one to the tune of several thousand dollars.
others have received much higher bills than the amount they've used...

that just ain't right....

Those types of clowns usually disappear from the market pretty quickly. California at one point had over 180 companies registered as retail providers of electricity, but 90% of them were clueless and never would have done business. Enron's approach (God, I wish I hadn't lost the flyer) was to have "independent contractors" (so they didn't have to pay the morons) as independent sales agents going door to door with flyers and crap they printed up themselves - no "official" Enron material, although the phone numbers and stuff you'd call to sign up were in fact Enron numbers - the thing was so unbelievable, I checked it out.

Another dork I overheard at a dessert place near downtown San Diego was working for some supposed energy marketer, promising resellers a 33% commission on sales, claiming that they could deliver a guaranteed 20% savings to the retail costumer, not counting "upline" commissions in an MLM scheme. I overheard that pitch, and broke out laughing so loud the scammer made the mistake of asking what I thought was so funny.

First I pointed out that between the wholesale price of power they'd be paying, and the transmission and distribution charges they'd pay to the utility to carry that power to the residential customer, there wasn't a ten percent margin, let alone 33% plus upline commissions plus a 20% savings. Then the guy had to one-up me, so he said:

"Well. That may be true for some folks, but we have a contract to buy power at a very favorable price."

Me: "How much, from who, and delivered from where?"

"Well, that's confidential, of course."

Me: "No, sorry, it isn't. All wholesale power transactions other than short-term dispatch trading between regulated utilities have to be approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the parties, quantities, price and terms of sale are all public record. Everybody in the industry knows the details of the wholesale power transactions of everyone else. If you don't believe me, feel free to call the electricity division of the FERC."

The guy was pretty steamy at that point, but he knew when to shut up. I don't think he managed to sign up his MLM victim, though.

All that kind of horseshit normally dies out instantly in the deregulated market, if it ever gets there. Enron gave up on their quarter-assed retail marketing game before it ever started, so they never played in that low-end retail market. With their approach, they never would have gotten anywhere in the first place, but it's hard to believe a company could get that large and be that clueless.

Odin · May 4, 2003, 15:27

I knew Enron was full of BS, but thats hilarious!!!

MichaeltheGreat · May 4, 2003, 15:32

The MLM dork wasn't Enron - he was just one of the many get rich quick scammers who flocked in to the marketplace and went nowhere.

Enron was just the door to door guy, but they were at least (not) paying those guys straight commissions, no MLM. First class marketing support, though.

Imran Siddiqui · May 4, 2003, 18:34

MtG:

Thanks for the good info (I knew you'd show up sooner or later

).

Deregulation is definetly good in many markets. When you have one company which controls everything in one industry you have problems. When you start getting choices in the market, it really causes prices to fall because the bigwig monopoly provider can't gouge people's eyes out.

If you look at the converse, when you have a bunch of providers and then one company buys out the others, you end up with much higher prices, because that one provider can basically say 'screw you'.

Odin · May 4, 2003, 18:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
MtG:

Thanks for the good info (I knew you'd show up sooner or later

).

Deregulation is definetly good in many markets. When you have one company which controls everything in one industry you have problems. When you start getting choices in the market, it really causes prices to fall because the bigwig monopoly provider can't gouge people's eyes out.

If you look at the converse, when you have a bunch of providers and then one company buys out the others, you end up with much higher prices, because that one provider can basically say 'screw you'.

I'm confused, it looks like you contradicted yourself between the 2 paragraphs.

wouldent it be best if you have as many providers as possible?

MRT144 · May 4, 2003, 18:45

Imran, there is also the problem which i believe has affected the radio and tv medias and that is deregulation. Basicly it has not been in the consumers best interest for all these media mergers because the consumer now has less of a choice in news and opinions and that is a imperitive of a good information and media system.

Agathon · May 4, 2003, 18:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Q Cubed
windows also comes with support packs free of charge:

to move from winxp to winxp sp1 costs nothing but time.

to move from osx 10.0 to osx 10.1 to osx 10.2 is usd$160, minimum.

To move from 10.0 to 10.1 was free. All you had to do was go down to the store with POP and they would give you it for nothing.

10.2 is a significant upgrade with lots more stuff - it isn't a service pack.

Kidicious · May 4, 2003, 18:53

Deregulation is always an industry scam. It's just a matter of how much more money they can rip us off for. If you are fooled by big business than shame on you.

Imran Siddiqui · May 4, 2003, 19:04

Quote:

I'm confused, it looks like you contradicted yourself between the 2 paragraphs. wouldent it be best if you have as many providers as possible?

Isn't that what I said? The 2nd paragraph that I described would be a BAD thing

.

Deregulation doesn't mean you abandon anti-trust laws

. It just means that you allow more companies to come into the market.