Power outage problem, de-regulation, related issues... MY THOUGHTS!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Odin

This is why normal people should stay in the "flip the switch and it works" mode. You don't want to see what's really behind the curtain to make all that switch flipping work as seamlessly as it does.

[Odin]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


This is why normal people should stay in the "flip the switch and it works" mode. You don't want to see what's really behind the curtain to make all that switch flipping work as seamlessly as it does.

I'm not normal, I am a BIONERD!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Spiffor

The system is not completely broken down. But it's the second time in a few years that the strongest economy on earth knows a major power outage, in quite ordinary weather conditions. Imran and Adam told us that the Californian ones happened because of an insufficient deregulation, but this opinion is pure speculation.

Cali was major, and is still a problem if you get an economic boom tied to an extended drought. Regulation or deregulation wasn't the issue, it was more a case of bad timing, a lot of bad luck, and a couple of decades of cumulative mismanagement and unrealistic expectations on the part of industry, utilities, consumers and government.

You Euros have a tight little grid with lots of hydro power (particularly pumped hydro), so now matter how much we spend, we'll never have reliability levels like yours, unless we grow some mountains and shrink the continent.

The northeast wasn't major - it was a fraction of a day one off event, and the system did what it was designed to do - inconvenience a bunch of users for hours, rather than let something really blow up and inconvenience those users for days or weeks.

[HershOstropoler]

MtG:

Thanks.

"The problem isn't so much overall grid capacity, but transfer points within substations."

Iow, bottlenecks? Is there no regulation dealing with that specific issue?

"There are some aspects of the regional grids that are subject to Federal regulation"

What are those aspects, roughly?

"There are designated ISO's, but their scale and regulatory control varies from the NERC regional councils."

So this is in effect all based on self-regulation?

"The WECC has multiple ISO's, and a majority of areas which are non-ISO operated (two main dispatchers are Federal agencies - WAPA and BPA, plus several states still have fully regulated, fully dispatching utilities)"

With those federal and state operators, there is no separation between their function as a network provider and a power producer, and no single set of regulation?

"The ISO model is about assuring impartiality between system operations and market conditions, so as not to favor some market participants over others, rather than a reliability issue."

That's the basic idea, though EU regulation has put reliability requirements on top of this. So I was curious...

Is it a fair characterization that there is a chaotic patchwork of federal, state and self-regulation?

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by Spiffor

The solution will be either to have a healthy competition (I hardly see that happen because of the high entry costs)

Well you have to differentiate between two aspects: the network and the power generation/sale. Networks always require pretty intrusive regulation so you can get competition on the goods and services distributed via that network. It works quite well for electricity and telcos so far; railways is quite mixed; water is more problematic.

[MichaeltheGreat]

You're trying to turn a Sava-troll into an intelligent discussion?

I'll be back later, gotta get ready now to go do the kid of friend birthday party circuit, so they'll do the kid of friend birthday circuit when Ian's birthday comes up.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
You're trying to turn a Sava-troll into an intelligent discussion?

I was looking for a challange.

[Berzerker]

In other words, there are auto mechanics turning the nuts and bolts and then there are the loose nuts behind the wheel.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
Well you have to differentiate between two aspects: the network and the power generation/sale.

Yep, I know that. Most distribution networks remained public or semi-public. But sometimes, the politicians demand some rentability to the distribution networks themselves (ever checked Deutsche Telekom recently ? Never deal with these crooks, formerly a very decent business )

Networks always require pretty intrusive regulation so you can get competition on the goods and services distributed via that network.

I'd go further. Networks should be considered as nothing more as an "externality provider", and should always have a mentality of public interest, NOT personal interest.

It works quite well for electricity and telcos so far; railways is quite mixed; water is more problematic.

I'd have to disagree. My experience with telcos (in France and Germany) is quite mixed. Sure you can get cheaper prices for calls that were formerly expansive (foreign calls), but I have seen all companies becoming more sharky, private and public companies becoming crooks to their clients, and public companies (who provide both service and network) sink to the financial high end.

I have no direct experience with electricity. However, electricity production is quite a serious investment. Besides, the unsure half-life of electricity companies makes it impossible to have a reasonable nuclear investment: nuclear plants require a very expensive and very long upkeep after they stop functioning, and after they stop bringing any money. The producer of nuclear energy must be sure to exist for at least 50 years. Only the State (or public/sponsored companies) can have this pretention.

[HershOstropoler]

Spiffor:

"But sometimes, the politicians demand some rentability to the distribution networks themselves"

Yes, they should be privatized.

What's the problem with DT? I have T-Mobile, but here they are the underdog...

"Networks should be considered as nothing more as an "externality provider", and should always have a mentality of public interest, NOT personal interest."

I don't like that because it usually leads to cost distortions. Roads are the best example.

"but I have seen all companies becoming more sharky, private and public companies becoming crooks to their clients, and public companies (who provide both service and network) sink to the financial high end."

In the network area?

"nuclear plants require a very expensive and very long upkeep after they stop functioning, and after they stop bringing any money. The producer of nuclear energy must be sure to exist for at least 50 years."

Make them buy insolvency insurance or have funds for that. Nuclear energy is so oversubsidised it's sickening.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
If we had true 'Democracy', homosexuality would still be a crime today. Without any 'rights of the minority' no homosexual activists would ever be heard and outdated thinking would continue. Think about that for a second.
I'm sure EVERY minority is glad that the US has never had a true democracy.
Government is better when it is more connected to the people. Local government is the most connected, therefore it is better . Certain localities join together for bigger things. These larger governmental entities should do the things that the private sector or the localities cannot do.

I hate to burst your bubble, but the ideal form of government is the absolute, unbreakable dictatorship of a tireless man completely sympathetic to my ideals who preferably does not happen to be me. I thought everyone knew that.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
MtG:

Thanks.

"The problem isn't so much overall grid capacity, but transfer points within substations."

Iow, bottlenecks? Is there no regulation dealing with that specific issue?

Won't be going to the kiddy b-days for a little while, so....

No, there's no specific regulation scheme in place, because the bottlenecks are occasional (depending on extreme loads), and they'll tend to migrate over time, as people and loads move around. In 2000, Cali had several, now it has none. There's a bit of competing regulatory issue wrt air quality (which is regulated at different levels), in the sense that most high load areas have ****ty air quality, and are non-attainment areas for meeting Clean Air Act standards. This puts an additional economic impact on siting inside the bottlenecks. The market and overall macroeconomic conditions catch up, but the bottlenecks eventually appear someplace else, so you have a kind of continuous process of chasing the next problem area.

"There are some aspects of the regional grids that are subject to Federal regulation"

What are those aspects, roughly?

The FERC regulates access and commercial issues, but they provide only minimum mandates to NERC and the RRC's, essentially just enough in critical areas to create a mandatory enforcement mechanism.

"There are designated ISO's, but their scale and regulatory control varies from the NERC regional councils."

So this is in effect all based on self-regulation?

Self-regulation isn't a good description. The major generators have board seats on the RRC's, but the RRC's are mostly tech weenies (IT, control systems, generation equipment, some dispatch center geeks) who've never been involved in the moneygrubbing side of the industry. Think of a bunch of Thomas á Beckets, but there's no king per se, so no way to be rid of the turbulent priests.

"The WECC has multiple ISO's, and a majority of areas which are non-ISO operated (two main dispatchers are Federal agencies - WAPA and BPA, plus several states still have fully regulated, fully dispatching utilities)"

With those federal and state operators, there is no separation between their function as a network provider and a power producer, and no single set of regulation?

The overall regulatory scheme is the same (the RRC / NERC model), but in some situations, details are different. For example, allowable variance between voltage or current between different phases (known generally as phase imbalance) has a hard regulatory control across the board. Amount of black start cabability and ready and standby reserve levels vary in different large scale areas, because they're dependent on the type of generating portfolio available. The reliability goal is the same, but the turbulent priests are technoweenies, so they consider the difference between a system with lots of big coal fired units, and one with a mix of hydro, gas peakers and oil burners, and they adapt the reserve requirements for the respective systems.

"The ISO model is about assuring impartiality between system operations and market conditions, so as not to favor some market participants over others, rather than a reliability issue."

That's the basic idea, though EU regulation has put reliability requirements on top of this. So I was curious...

Historically, since it was formed in the '60s, there's been widespread satisfaction with the NERC and RRC's, as they're objective, independent organizations with good participation from all parties. ISO's really developed out of the market-leveling need, since existing dispatch operations were conducted by the major utility players.

Is it a fair characterization that there is a chaotic patchwork of federal, state and self-regulation?

Not really. It's not particularly chaotic, because there are well defined lines of jurisdiction on the government side, and it's pretty rare to have Federal-state pissing matches.

The self-regulation tag really doesn't fit, due to the turbulent priest robes you're issued when you join the RRC or NERC orders. (My dad, who only worked for one regulated utility for two years in the 1970's, twice turned down an unsolicited job offer to be the CEO for the WECC because he didn't want to relocate. He's more of a pure generating and equipment geek, whereas I'm a general utility (water, electricity and gas) operations geek. Also, you have regulatory agencies and consumer groups with board level participation and active involvement in policy formation and review, so it's more like a neutral NGO regulatory scheme than self-regulation.

[TCO]

I have a friend who worked at Mirant who was down on the electrical utilities and regulators in NYC. Essentially he said that they were trying to transfer certain types of reserve requirements onto the federal government rather than paying IPPS or whoever for what the option value costs.

[TCO]

Don't remember the exact details but that was the gist of it.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
What's the problem with DT? I have T-Mobile, but here they are the underdog...

I will not tell you about all the problems me or my friends have experienced with German phones, otherwise I'd write 5 pages...
But DT told us that installing a line in my rommate's and myself's rooms would cost 50€ each. We heard by chance that there would be a 75€ extra, and it was a hell to cancel the deal we accepted with false info. One of my friends didn't have this luck, and paid the full price...
For some odd reason, other people from my class (who moved to Stuttgart at the same time, and who were in the same situation) only had to pay 25€ grand total. We have yet to figure out why...
BTW, DT only gives a 10 days delay to wire the money after the bill has been printed, before charging a Mahnung. Obviously, the bill takes about 4-6 days to arrive in your mailbox
Besides, incompetent staff plagues DT, to the point a competent worker is a rare sight. Once, 3 people consecutively given me a false info. I had to bother one of the few good DT employees in Stuttgart for half an hour for her to correct the mess of her many incompetent colleagues.
For some reason, when we all moved to Stuttgart for the first time 3 years ago (we move back and forth between Stuttgart and Bordeaux), we didn't have any problems of this kind with DT. Things were clear, and the staff could inform us. Besides, DT wasn't on the verge to take as much money as possible from gullible students.


This is not only a problem with DT. My girlfriend and a friend of hers are using O2 (partly because they heard about our dreadful experience). Despite having signed contracts for 2 renewable months, they ended up with 24-months contracts. Such a thing was useless to them as they were only to stay in Stuttgart for 12 months. My gf and her friend had the worst time to get rid of their contract: they had to provide proof of them moving to France with a French Anmeldebestätigung ! (there is no equivalent of this paper in France).

In France, where the market is thankfully much less deregulated, a friend of mine took a contract with the private 9 telecom. Because of the ****ty service, he cancelled the contract. The company didn't take it into account and continued to demand money, and even threatened to send lawyers to get it (the contract was cancelled perfectly legally). Countless phone calls did nothing about the situation, and things only got solved when my friend begun to threaten them himself with special mail and such...

These are merely my direct experiences with deregulated phone. Sure, foreign calls are cheaper. And stress related to telephone is now much worse. I wouldn't call that an absolute success.

Please note that I can't blame DT for its behaviour. DT has lost its ways to make money (charging high prices for faraway calls), but yet has to provide cheap local calls and to care of the network. There is no surprise they make huge losses this way. Since cretin politicians demand DT to make money, they have no choice but to hire incompetent staff and to snatch money wherever they can.