Fortnightly

I wanted deregulation. But not if we can't do it right.

As an economist, I confess I failed to predict the disaster in California. But I wasn't the only one. Anybody who tells you differently is either lying, fooling himself, or guilty of Monday morning quarterbacking.

Frontlines

Très Riches Heures

 

How to price energy during a stage 3 alert?

You know the painting. Les Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry. You probably saw it first in Janson's "History of Art", in a college survey course.

 

But the fly in the ointment is computer modeling, where no one yet agrees on how to mirror the real world.

A promise made is a promise kept, even in the halls of government.

How the FERC risks a free-for-all in cases for gas facility authorization.

By final rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has adopted a new optional process for applicants seeking a pipeline certificate or gas import/export authority under the Natural Gas Act to construct, operate or abandon a jurisdictional facility.[Fn.1] It's known as the Pre-Filing Collaborative Process, or PFCP, but it means trouble.

In seeking to speed up administrative review, the FERC has only invited delay.

Having decided that California's three major investor-owned utilities (IOUs) exert greater market power in generation and transmission than the IOUs had let on in detailed studies filed last summer, but finding no purpose in asking for a second round of hefty documents, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has decided to explore options for mitigating such market power before approving the proposal by the IOUs (Southern California Edison Co., Pacific Gas & Electric Co., and San Diego Gas and Electric Co.) to form a Power Exchange (PX) and Independent system Operator (ISO).

Let's hope that by now we all prefer market solutions to government mandates. Markets are generally more efficient and equitable. Recent experiences with deregulation for airlines and telecommunications have vindicated Adam Smith's notion that the "invisible hand" can prove superior to regulation.

Unfortunately, this knowledge offers little comfort today to natural gas pipelines (em even to those companies not saddled with a surplus of transportation capacity.

Models can overcome a key oversight (em

that both supply and demand affect competition.

This past December, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a policy statement describing important changes in how it will evaluate proposed mergers under the Federal Power Act's public interest standard. These changes should lead to significant improvements (em not only in the evaluation of mergers, but also for other matters that affect market power, %n1%n including industry restructuring and market-based pricing.

Applicants can only hope that a prompt review won't be even more difficult

By a unanimous vote, on December 18, 1996, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued Order No. 592, stating how it intends to evaluate utility mergers. The anticipation has ended, yet those hoping for a new approach and a quicker review are bound to be disappointed.

Order 592 is a "Policy Statement." As such, it only announces intentions; it imposes no new obligations and is not subject to judicial review until implemented in a specific case.

Salt River Project (SRP) says it may ask the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to resolve a dispute with El Paso Electric Co.