Perspective

Two Cato analysts suggest a return to the past-vertical integration, but now with no state regulators.

The defeat of the energy bill in the Senate last year has thrown electricity restructuring back on its heels. There clearly is no consensus among politicians or academics regarding how this industry ought to be organized or how it might best be regulated. Finding our way out of this morass requires a reconsideration of how we got to this dismal point in our regulatory journey.

Will the CFTC move Into FERC's house?

Most of us in the energy industry have long thought that the "transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce" falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The same goes for electric sales at wholesale, if also conducted in interstate commerce. We know that because the law¹ and the courts tell us so. And natural gas is much the same.²

Generators struggle to plan for the future as they cope with an unstable present.

When the acting administrator at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Marianne Horinko, signed the EPA's "routine replacement" rule on Aug. 27, 2003, she proclaimed that the new approach to Clean Air Act regulation would "provide … power plants with the regulatory certainty they need."

Perspective

A decade of restructuring has not affected the financial integrity of the average regulated utility.

Ideological bias, economic principles, success of previous deregulation, inordinate greed, and political expediency fueled the movement for electricity deregulation. The authorities, however, never deregulated. They chose to restructure.

The road to the current reliability crisis is paved with four decades of bad policy decisions.

 

The technical causes of the great Northeast blackout of August 2003 are coming into focus. For reasons yet unknown as of press time, transmission lines in northern Ohio were lost to the grid, and within seconds 50 million people in the United States and Canada were without power. Soon we will no doubt know the specific reasons for the blackout, and technical corrections and improvements will be made.

Perspective

The crisis of confidence in today's power industry is, at its heart, a crisis of ideas.

 

After 10 years of waiting, some experts say a Republican-controlled Congress and a patriotic mood will make the difference in passing energy legislation this year.

Could this be the year that Congress passes a comprehensive national energy bill? That's the question on the mind of the utilities industry. Some say with Republicans controlling both the U.S. House and Senate-not to mention the presidency-the prospects for comprehensive energy legislation are bright. But some pundits are not so sure.

It's a law that only a mother could love.

It's tough to write another word about repealing the Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA), or the "35 Act," as it is also known, referring to its Depression-era origins. But like the Energizer bunny, this debate keeps on going and going.

It's almost 70 years later, and the issue has outlived several generations of utility executives, regulators, lawyers, bankers, academics, and a few magazine editors. Heck, it may outlive us all.

How state opposition cowed the feds and turned a powerful rule into just a set of talking points.

A funny thing happened on the way to a standard market design (SMD). What began as a full-fledged rulemaking-with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) giving instructions and imposing deadlines on the electric utility industry-now has degenerated into little more than a set of talking points.

Talk about cold feet.

FERC: SMD/Grid Issues Lead 2003 Agenda