Debates over utility business and regulatory models have sidestepped a fundamental question: What do state legislators and regulators want the electricity utility of the future to do? Do they want "fat" utilities that play a larger role in implementing public policy and delivering energy services to customers? Or "skinny" utilities that are more narrowly focused on the ownership and upkeep of the grid?

A downward shift in peak usage may mean a beginning change in elasticity of demand. A more rapid and pronounced downshift in peak demand might suggest a less robust utility franchise value.

I do not understand why we are still distracted by Net Energy Metering (NEM). It worked well when we had not-so-smart meters and were trying to encourage rooftop solar penetration. People in general and students of regulation in particular are left confused and can easily find some support for both sides. This results in conflicts and proposed compromises that keep the debate going at full tilt. Two things are missing or mostly overlooked in all this regulatory discourse.

It is important to help legislators and regulators understand the utility's risk management decisions so that they can approve of the company's risk management strategies. Legislators and regulators are accustomed to thinking in terms of insuring against failures.

Innovation success will require that utilities build distinct internal capabilities combined with parallel, directed future investment. However, they will supplement this activity simultaneously with external leverage through venture capitalists, start-ups, OEMs, partners and acquisitions. This formula is already being followed by a number of companies that have been leading the sector in formalizing innovation as a capability.

Over the past several years, Moody's Investors Service has published original research on cyber risk as a factor of growing importance to credit analysis. Lesley Ritter leads Moody's cyber risk research from the perspective of the utilities sector, and addresses some key questions.

We continue to rush towards a renewable future without considering overall system design, the costs that various renewable scenarios impose on grid operation, and the operation of the grid with these scenarios. When the externalities of climate change and ocean acidification create an overwhelming mandate to move away from fossil fuels, we have no choice but to go forward. Shouldn't we try to pick the cheapest path?

Part I examined the evolving role of state regulators in addressing cybersecurity in the energy sector. Part II surveys best practices in various locations and recommends methods for developing regulatory procedures that will ensure the security of critical energy assets.

Many supporters of nuclear technology have tried to correct significant challenges on assorted issues from the public, the media, and the scientific, regulatory and political sectors. But these efforts failed; they could not acknowledge the true illness and pursue the cure. This discussion focuses on what that illness is, how the industry has treated it, how to cure it, and one way to achieve a new political and regulatory environment that can save the patient.

The legal cannabis industry in the U.S. is experiencing rapid growth. That growth and its commensurate energy demands are placing strains on some individual utilities and local grids. In Part I, we forecast electricity demands, analyze problems resulting from the immense energy requirements, and assess some potential implications for the cannabis industry and for utilities.