Commission

Minnesota Coalition Joins Debate

A broad coalition of Minnesota electric cooperatives, municipal utilities, consumer advocates, and environmentalists has joined the debate over the restructuring of the state's electric industry.

Mailbag

Nice Try!American Gas Association president and CEO Michael Baly's response to my article ("Electric Reliability: How PJM Tripped on Gas-fired Plants," May 1, 1995) concerning the January 19, 1994, rolling blackouts in the PJM power pool is damage control that fails. Here are the facts that Mr. Baly either ignores or distorts:

Forty percent of PJM's coal generation did not operate during the rolling blackouts. At least 80 percent of PJM's total generation where gas was the primary or sole fuel did not operate when needed.

People

Joseph Santaniello has been named director of management information systems for NUI Corp. He was previously director of engineering at Elizabethtown Gas, NUI's New Jersey operating division. Stephen Liaskos, formerly controller at Metallgesellschaft Corp., joins NUI as controller. Michael A. Palecki, most recently of the Florida Public Service Commission, has been named v.p. of regulatory affairs for NUI's southern division.

BICC Utility Cable Co.

Frontlines

And wires in the air. Together they form the interstate natural gas pipelines and the electric transmission grid. When the talk turns to deregulation, whether on the gas or the electric side, the pipelines and the transmission grid are almost always voted "most likely to." That is, to remain regulated monopolies (em with cost-of-service rates protected by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).

Let's have a look at that idea.

The FERC has unbundled gas commodity sales from pipeline transportation.

Can the FERC Overcome Special Interest Politics?Jim Rossi

The competitive transformations of the natural gas and telecommunications industries are over a decade in the making. By contrast, competition in the electricity industry is still emerging. Special interests have defeated many proposed competitive reforms. For example, in 1988 the FERC failed in its attempt to adopt regulations to encourage competitive bidding and independent power producers (IPPs).1 Similarly, decades of forceful industry opposition delayed open access in bulk-power markets.

Utility Finance After the TransitionJames T. Doudiet, John Higley, and Patricia Eckert

DOUDIET:Stranded investment has overshadowed other financial issues in the transition to a competitive electric utility industry. For example, what will post-transitional companies look like? Will they attract growth-oriented investors?

Utilities as monopolies enjoyed unparalleled access to the capital markets because price was based on cost. That structure assured the ability to raise funds under any and all circumstances, but it created an atypical industry.

Commentary: Making Restructuring ProfitableRalph Cavanagh

Investments that minimize life-cycle costs of reliable energy services should be more profitable to utilities than those that fail that test. This perceptive article shows that Puget Power and the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) share that view.Too many utilities still hesitate to finance energy savings that cost less than the displaced power production.

Mortgaging Your Conservation: A Way Out for Stranded Investment?Andrea L. Kelly and Donald E. Gaines

When an electric utility invests in a resource to serve its customers, it does so with the belief that the asset underlying the investment can be pledged as collateral to secure debt capital. But what happens if the asset is not owned by the company and, therefore, provides no collateral? The following situations illustrate:

Situation A

Electric utility "A" chooses to build a small generating plant to meet the future needs of its growing customer base.

Off Peak

"Througout much of the

history of generation, technology

devolved at a very slow pace after

the construction of the first generation

of large central generation stations. With

the development of nuclear energy in the

1940s and 1950s, the government promoted an

alternative energy source that was expected to

provide a cheap source of power as well as

provide a source of plutonium for nuclear

weapons development.