Re: [SLUG-POL] It's Quiet in here

From: Steven Johnson (alinuxguru@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Feb 18 2002 - 12:58:22 EST


----Original Message Follows----
On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 07:28:36PM +0000, Steven Johnson wrote:
>It appears as if you derived your numbers from an electric commodities
>interest group, and we all know how reliable companies like Enron are
>(read: and, I quote "What a lot of drivel!") or you are using last years
>numbers based on flawed data.

>The California Energy Commission is an "electric commodities interest
>group"?

The numbers below are from the California Energy Commission. These numbers
clearly contradict the numbers you provided.

> "The Summer Adequacy Report" (After-the-fact report) showed a margin
above
> 15 percent of loads over resources.
>
> Emergencies were declared by Independent System Operators (ISO) when the
> offers of capacity (read: electric commodities brokers such as Enron)
were
> insufficient to meet its reliability criteria. Next day real-time
sellers
> were there to avert these emergencies, but at exorbitant market-clearing
> prices. (read: chicken and egg)
>
> There was a 10% reserve margin across all hours during which emergencies
> were declared by the ISO. The actual reserve margin averaged over 20
> percent.
>
> > 2. The capacity planning turned out to be an allocation problem.
>
> See above, and *current* CEC figures. Also see Robert McCullough's
> statistical analysis, titled "Price Spike Tsunami: How Market Power
Soaked
> California." which can be found in the Jan. 1, 2001, issue of
> _Public_Utilities_Fortnightly_,
>
> In fact, it was regulatory uncertainty and economic decisions by
utilities
> and private generating companies that halted the construction of new
plants.
>
> Even the energy companies themselves concede this point. Houston-based
> Reliant Energy, which operates four Southern California plants, told The
Los
> Angeles Times that assertions that environmental regulations were holding
> back power production were "absolutely false."
>

>Again, I suspect at base this is still incorrect. I don't have time to
>check morgues and cull the internet for specific quotes, and public
>proceedings for each power plant application filed. But I do know that
>California and the Pacific Northwest is crawling with environmentalists.
>And I know how much trouble they cause in connection with things like
>power plants. It seems reasonable that they would hinder plant openings
>in California. You may be correct, but I won't take your word for it
>when my instincts indicate otherwise.

Whether you choose to believe the facts or not is irrelevant. The facts are
still the facts. I have provided about a half a dozen references, citing
newspapers, industry trade magazines, and even one energy producers. The
industry, media, and environmentalists all converge on this one point and
agree that no plant construction was hindered.

>
> >Part of your contention appears to be that Enron and others like them
> >caused all this shortage business. Investigations were called for in
> >California at the time, and to my knowledge, none turned up any
> >misconduct on the part of power generators and wholesalers.
>
> Ahem, actually quite a few are in the works or have already been
published.
> By the CEC, the CPUC, and others.
>

>I've seen no mention of them. Where are the results? If they're taking
>this long to get and publish facts, then I suspect nothing substantive
>is in the offing.

No one said what was done by Enron and the ilk was "illegal" or "criminal"
so nothing substantive probably will happen. But real-time demand price
manipulations are an established fact.

>Obviously you've been following this issue closely. What's your
>interest? Do you work in the industry?

No, I am not a ringer. Last year I knew it was an allocation and not a
capacity issue. So, I have been following it closely for the last several
months, reading about a half dozen industry trade magazines and statistical
analysis. As it turns out, I was right. Even Michael Moore agrees with
more.

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:08:19 EDT