SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   PastimesThe California Energy Crisis - Information & Forum


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: Don Knowlton who wrote (30)2/15/2001 12:47:39 PM
From: Patricia Trinchero
   of 1715
 
No Layoffs Here
Follow the Money

Following the money is the key to understanding the Bush administration. Once you figure out who gave how much, look for the quid pro quo. Take, for example, Enron, the big Texas natural gas and trading company, and its current chairman Ken Lay. He's friends with, and was a backer of, the president's father. As Business Week sets it out, Lay stepped in after Bush Sr. got beaten by Clinton in 1992, arranging a stopover at Enron for ex-secretary of state James Baker and former commerce secretary Robert Mosbacher, who became consultants.

Enron ponied up $500,000 for Dubya's Texas gubernatorial campaigns, making it his largest single contributor. During last year's presidential campaign, the firm contributed corporate jets to the Republicans and gave $250,000 for their convention in Philadelphia, Business Week reports, while Lay himself plunked down $100,000 for the inaugural committee and was Bush's adviser on energy during the campaign. Enron's total listed contributions to the Republicans during last year's presidential race ran to $1.8 million, according to Public Citizen.

Lay currently is a prominent adviser to Spencer Abraham, the free-trade maniac who is secretary of energy. From Enron's point of view, this puts Lay in the catbird seat. Abraham is the member of the Bush team who deals with the energy crisis in California, where Enron is a major supplier. Recently, Abraham infuriated Western governors—some of them Republicans—by refusing to consider government price controls to halt runaway energy prices.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: deepenergyfella who started this subject2/15/2001 10:58:42 PM
From: deepenergyfella
   of 1715
 
Chris Edmonds and Dan Pickering Chat on RealMoney.com
By Christopher Edmonds
Special to TheStreet.com
Originally posted at 8:11 PM ET 2/14/01 on RealMoney.com



Christopher Edmonds and Dan Pickering chatted on RealMoney.com at 4 p.m. EST Wednesday, Feb. 14.

TSC-RealMoneyLaura: Thanks for joining us today. We'll be chatting with RealMoney.com columnist Chris Edmonds and his special guest Dan Pickering about the energy crisis.

CSEonTSC: Welcome all, and a special welcome to Dan Pickering, director of research at Simmons and Co. in Houston. Dan is one of the brightest minds in the energy investment field. And, we are both ready for your questions. Happy Valentine's Day. ... Here we go!

rfmo-guest: Dan: Utility companies are building six power plants within 50 miles of where we work in California. Guess what, they are all natural gas-fired. What other source of fuel could be used for power plants since gas is as expensive as the power the plants will produce? Thanks for your input.

RM_DanP: Gas is primary choice ... but hydroelectric, coal and fuel oil are all options.

RM_DanP: For those under construction, it's too late to change 'em -- expensive.

CSEonTSC: It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a resurgence in clean coal technology in the coming years. Certainly, if you look at coal stocks that is being priced in.

CSEonTSC: And, don't discount -- a longshot I know -- a resurgence in nuclear as a possibility. Limited, but it sure makes some sense.

RM_DanP: Coal costs more to build the plant, but much less to operate. If clean coal works, we will see more coal planned

rfmo-guest: Chris: What are your thoughts on Chevron? We have record earnings, a P/E of 10 and the Texaco purchase with what looks like lowering interest rates for borrowing the money. Also, Berkley has just hit some major gas wells near us in California's San Joaquin Valley. Thanks for your thoughts, RFM.

CSEonTSC: Good question I'm not sure I'm terribly comfortable with the combination yet. But, maybe I'll get there.

CSEonTSC: As for the Berkley discoveries, they are soon to be a part of Anadarko. I spent part of lunch with Bob Allison of Anadarko today and he is very high on the purchase. They paid a nice price, but it looks like a good buy for them over time.

RM_DanP: The street pays for size/scale. CHV/TX should see multiple expansion. Going forward, volume growth will become the focus. It isn't enough to generate cash, but successfully reinvesting that cash is becoming ever more important.

CSEonTSC: Dan makes a good point -- reinvestment of cash flow is going to become a big focus this year, especially if these companies throw off as much cash as they could.

SleepingMan-guest: How do you think the energy crisis will affect the stocks of other companies which are not related to the energy industry?

CSEonTSC: Look at the warnings you are seeing from companies across sectors. I think you are already seeing a decline in demand as a result of price. I think it is still a bit too early to know for certain, but it has had an impact on the economy and will continue to do so. I think the commodity to watch, however, is gas. That is where the biggest hurt will come from.

RM_DanP: Higher energy costs have begun flowing through -- either in higher prices (inflation!) or in compressed margins -- downward pressure on earnings! Neither particularly bullish.

kathi_sanger-guest: Hi guys ... opinion of APA, APC, and SLB?...thanks.

RM_DanP: APA = buy and exploit. Pretty cheap. Our favorite in the E&P sector.

RM_DanP: APC = finds oil and gas. Relatively expensive, but have earned the multiple. Like the stock around $60.

RM_DanP: SLB = recent acquisition has spooked people. Downside = low $60s, more likely = return to mid-high $70s. Don't sell. Buy aggressively below $60.

CSEonTSC: Like the APA story as well. I heard them this morning at the UBS energy conference and they are on track to have a good year. I agree with Dan. Anadarko -- I like the management team a lot. I agree with Dan that they are pricey but you buy quality. As for SLB -- agree again, but also think that Jim Cramer makes an interesting point in his missives about the overreaction to the acquisition.

RM_DanP: APA clarification: Company is a buyer of assets, then exploits.

Kobe guest: It has been said that there is enough oil in the U.S. right now to combat an immediate energy crisis. Is this a fair statement?

RM_DanP: I don't think it's fair. On a days forward usage basis, oil inventories are as low as they have been in the past decade.

RM_DanP: The only way we have enough is if demand falls a bunch -- not a pretty scenario.

RM_DanP: I wouldn't call oil a crisis, but don't think we could handle a big jump in demand without much higher level of imports.

CSEonTSC: It depends on what you mean by crisis. Are we at risk of running out? No. Are we at risk of pricing pressures if supply slows materially or demand picks up as the economy regains steam? Absolutely. That said, I think you will see marginal production gains this year and more next year, with prices settling into the mid-20s. OPEC will get what they want and the economy won't suffer from prices at those levels.

SleepingMan-guest: What do you think, with the current energy crisis is the probability of scientists coming up with a new cheap and efficient energy resource, with the priority for such a resource continually growing?

CSEonTSC: Assume you are talking about power -- clearly, fuel cells hold promise, although are at least three to five years away from mass commercial and retail use. You can also exploit natural power sources -- wind, hydro, etc., although we are loath to increase hydro for environmental reasons. Fuel-cell technology holds the greatest long-term promise. I think it is promising but application is too early to tell how successful.

RM_DanP: High, sustained prices create the incentive to do a lot of R&D. Still will take at least a decade to identify and develop a realistic and widespread alternative.

TSC-RealMoneyLaura: When do you think the fuel cell tech will be available and in use. Won't they meet with resistance from the traditional energy providers?

CSEonTSC: It's available now; production is the issue. You are seeing pilot projects on line now. As for resistance, of course they will resist but the technology will largely supplement traditional fuel sources.

RM_DanP: As fuel-cell technology approaches commercial reality, expect energy companies to actively get involved (acquisition or internal R&D). They won't let themselves become obsolete.

Kokomo guest: Do other countries have energy crises like we do?

RM_DanP: Take a look at Russia right now. Literally people freezing because the infrastructure is so old.

RM_DanP: Interesting thing is that many Third World countries live in constant state of intermittent blackouts.

RM_DanP: We're catching up rapidly. Most other significant countries have more excess capacity in power than we do ... but not much.

CSEonTSC: As an aside, infrastructure -- especially in the power biz , is going to become a major issue in the U.S. Watch that for the next major story in power in the U.S.

stujohns-guest: With all the increased drilling activity, how much more room is there for the service cos. like KEG and the pipe suppliers like MVK to run?

RM_DanP: Decent upside remains. Work-over activity (KEG) is still below the peak levels of last cycle ... so more rigs likely to go back to work.

RM_DanP: MVK makes pipe a consumable ... demand up as drilling increases. Expect volume and price to improve.

RM_DanP: Pipe is a tough business... I like KEG better.

CSEonTSC: If you look at the valuation on the energy service companies, I think Dan is right. You can find some key metrics in a piece I penned last night from the UBS Warburg Energy Conference in New York going on right now. . .

gjohnson5613-guest: Given the ramp-up in gas demand, is pipeline capacity an issue in the next two years?

CSEonTSC: Absolutely -- there is no question that one of the reasons gas became so expensive in California this fall and winter is the lack of capacity to get the gas to the state. Part of that was the explosion on El Paso line. But, clearly, there is a need for more capacity.

CSEonTSC: And, there is clearly need to bring gas from Canada and, possibly, from Alaska. Pipe can't be built quickly. Alaska and the North [it] will be at least 2006 before meaningful capacity is available there.

cscomsft-guest: The Calpine Encal deal looks to be a winner for CPN reserves, pipeline space, and only paid about 2.5 times cash flow. Any thoughts?

RM_DanP: The big benefit is that CPN is locking up supply of a precious commodity ... the natural gas needed to power their plants.

RM_DanP: I expect to see more of these vertical integration -type deals.

CSEonTSC: Calpine has made it clear they want to own reserves to fuel their plants. I think Dan is right. . .. you'll see more of that.

jhavice-guest: Do you think we'll get the seasonal end-of-February selloff in energy stocks this year?

RM_DanP: Stock seasonality is a dangerous game to play when the market is choppy and the commodities are tight. Who knows?

amendonca-guest: Government has a role to play in encouraging alternatives. Do you see any action there?

RM_DanP: Government will have to play a role ... we need incentives and tax relief to encourage new energy sources of all types.

RM_DanP: Although government can also help encourage conservation, price is the biggest stick in that game.

CSEonTSC: They do, and the way not to do it is the way they are doing it in California. The reason there hasn't been significant power conservation in California is there are no price signals. There can be tax breaks and other incentives but they have to be combined with market-based priced signals.

cscomsft-guest: There cannot be very much storage injection upcoming by the LDCs ... if not, are we setting up for a real crunch from Nov. gas year?

RM_DanP: Storage injection will be lower than typical because of tight supply.

RM_DanP: This implies potential for strong gas prices through the summer and into fall. Might see typical shoulder months (August/September) as the strongest of the year!

CSEonTSC: The injection season will be much shorter and less pronounced than normal because of the increase in summer gas demand from power generation. Next winter could be very interesting.

dkmulle-guest: What's your read for whether any of PCGs creditors will force them into bankruptcy?

CSEonTSC: It grows by the day, but I don't think it will be the big creditors you might suspect. If there is not material state action by the end of the month and the federal courts don't grant a rate hike, bankruptcy is almost certain. I'd say the chances are a little less than 50% one of the utilities ends up in court.

RM_DanP: Anything possible where politics and money involved. Bankruptcy likely a last resort as it significantly lengthens the process to get paid -- which is what the creditors want.

firefire-guest: Hey guys, what is the prospect of the pipeline business in general and of Shaw Industries that does the coating for pipes big and small?

RM_DanP: Lots of pipe activity is likely over the next few years ... with a big opportunity in 2004-2007 with Alaska pipelines.

RM_DanP: Not a bad ancillary play.

firefire-guest: What are your like and dislikes about WMB and do you find its current price compelling, a push, dangerous?

RM_DanP: WMB has been a tough stock because of the significant telecommunications component.

RM_DanP: With telecom getting "cold" and energy getting "hot," there are lots of moving pieces. WCG --Telecom segment, spinout increasing likely. Prefer the energy piece. Telecom could fall in the dangerous area.

CSEonTSC: Agreed on the telecom issue I'll be interested to see what El Paso has to say tomorrow about their telecom business. I think telecom has now gone from an asset to a distraction.

sonodoc-guest: Why isn't solar more widely utilized, especially in the American Southwest?

RM_DanP: It's expensive. Solar is a great idea with very poor economics. Needs to be much more efficient before it is ever meaningful.

keetz4-guest : Thanks for getting to the oils on chat. I don't know them as well as tech. Do you see drillers leading the sector in terms of stock prices or natural gas or oil and gas? There are so many divisions I am unclear whether they will all do well. And what about the oil shippers like FRONY they are posting great earnings?!

RM_DanP: Rising energy tide will lift most of the sectors. Drillers showing best year-over-year earnings growth and have been the leaders.

RM_DanP: Likely continues until the economic outlook gets a little clearer.

RM_DanP: Tankers are cheap, but fear is business has plateaued. Decent yields. Not fast money stocks.

brent99-guest: Where is the Street generally on oil/gas prices as far as earnings models are concerned?

RM_DanP: Simmons is using $27 per barrel oil and $4.30 per mcf for gas. We are probably a bit above consensus on both.

RM_DanP: For what it's worth, we think we will probably be low on both commodities assuming the economy holds together OK.

CSEonTSC: I think, generally, you are seeing oil in the $25 range from the companies and gas between $4-4.25. However, you see longer-term price assumptions for gas as low as $2.75-3.00.

raypeg-guest: MSFT invested 6%? in PNM in New Mexico. Any thoughts?

CSEonTSC: Bill Gates also owns a piece of Avista, the former Washington Water Power. These are Buffett-like investments he must have come up with while playing bridge with Warren.

CSEonTSC: I don't understand the PNM investment. In the middle of a strange merger with Western Resoruces, which I am not high on although the utility holdings are profitable. I wouldn't have made the buy, but I don't have the money Gates has either. Decent dividends.

_05road-guest: Do you think natural gas conservation would derail this boom? I installed a computerized thermostat and cut my consumption by 20%. Isn't this the simplest way to reduce prices, and ensure supply? Also, isn't all the talk of opening up Alaska just a diversion to pave the way for exploration on the federal lands in the Rockies as the lesser of two evils? Do you really need both? Thank you.

RM_DanP: Conservation will certainly slow demand growth ... but new power plants alone will create growth of 2% next year.

RM_DanP: Alaska is not a diversion ... 20TCF annual consumption currently is headed to 30TCF over the next 10 years.

RM_DanP: We'll need the Rockies and Alaska to meet demand!

CSEonTSC: Congratulations -- not sure the thermostat is the solution for the masses, but nice savings. I think you have plenty of time left for gas to work probably not at $8, but certainly around $5, which will be plenty profitable for most of these companies.

justinqueree-guest: What should I be watching for when it comes to the inevitable negative turn in this cycle?

RM_DanP: Watch for large-scale new building of assets like drilling rigs.

RM_DanP: Watch for a flood of interest in the sector -- magazine covers, etc, which will signal investor "overenthusiasm."

RM_DanP: Watch for increasing supplies as a result of higher drilling levels. None of those events has happened in size yet ... good question! It is a cyclical business.

CSEonTSC: One of the things I am watching for is the point where E&P companies begin to raise their price assumptions to lofty levels to justify higher capital budgets. I think they have remained pretty constrained, although I have noticed this week at the UBS conference that there is beginning to be some creep in the assumptions. When you see capital budgets based on $26 oil or above and $5 gas and above, I'd be concerned.

bubabuba-guest: Besides CAT, who are the major suppliers of energy infrastructure to utilities & drillers? Thanks.

RM_DanP: On the drilling side, most of the suppliers of drilling equipment went out of business during the last few busts.

RM_DanP: The two largest suppliers are VRC and NOI ... both have seen backlogs begin to build in the past several quarters.

CSEonTSC: On the power side you have companies like GE that are major turbine suppliers. You also have construction companies like Shaw that are a major beneficiary of the buildout in new power plants.

jeffreybagleymccabe-: Care to name names as attractive E&P targets for the independent power producers?

CSEonTSC: I think you are more likely to see joint ventures. For example, EOG has a joint venture with Calpine to find and produce natural gas. I think you will see more of that. Clearly Apache and Anadarko would be interested as a way to cut their risk in new exploration programs. I'm not sure you will see large combinations as much as you will joint ventures.

RM_DanP: Look for relatively small companies with 10 years-plus reserve lives, primarily North American reserves/production; wouldn't expect deals to be huge, so focus below $1BB in market cap. As a rule, I never name takeover targets because I think it's a tough way to make money -- so many ways for a deal not to happen.

CSEonTSC: The deals you are likely to see are smaller ones of the Calpine-Encal variety.

RM_DanP: I agree with Chris that joint ventures are most likely approach.

shark435-guest:What will happen when it gets really hot in CA this summer?

CSEonTSC: I recommend the beach and the ocean. The power will go out and it will be tough. I really think the chance of major blackouts are significant.

RM_DanP: More of the same ... only this time the Californians will be saying "NOT AGAIN!" instead of "What's happening?" The current problem is not going to go away quickly. The state is fundamentally short of generation capacity.

CSEonTSC: There is a bit of new generation coming on-line but it won't be near enough. Also, you have a huge transmission issue from South to North you can't move power across the state to meet surging demand. If you can't import from the North and San Fran has a hot summer, they are in for trouble, in my opinion.

mikefowle-guest: Chris -- great coverage on the CA electricity story -- my question is ... If PCG and EIX are granted the right to increase, what do you think will happen to the rate of conservation among CA residents and businesses?

CSEonTSC: That's a great question and one that shows you are thinking!! I don't think many people are thinking about that issue. Honestly, I wish I knew.

CSEonTSC: I will say that I think the reason you haven't seen more conservation recently is that there aren't price signals to the consumer. If you agree with the free market proponents, higher prices mean less consumption, depending on elasticity of demand.

stujohns-guest: Does the recent strong run-up of MDR related to new coal plant construction signal a big return to coal? Is the new technology and co-generation clean and efficient enough to promote more?

CSEonTSC: I'm not sure a big return to coal. However, I do think coal will return as a new fuel option. Ken Lay of Enron told me last fall that the new clean-coal technology combined with high natural gas prices would push the use of coal to higher levels. How much higher, I don't think anyone is certain. It will return as part of the new power mix, however, in the next couple of years.

dkmulle-guest: I've read conflicting information about whether Capstone Turbine's micro-turbines could be useful to alleviate the CA problem. What's your take? Can they be set up quickly? Can they be plugged into the grid? Do they meet environmental regulations?

CSEonTSC: Distributed generation is part of the solution. However, it is not a panacea. So many of these alternative fuel stocks have run on the California news. The run is not sustainable. While Capstone is an important part of the solution, be careful in all these stocks.

tedhondo-guest: Is it just coincidence that the entire energy spectrum (oil, gas, refinery capacity, electrical capacity) is very tight at the same point in time ?

RM_DanP: Yes and no. Not a coincidence because industry has underinvested in capacity since the early 1970s.

RM_DanP: Is a coincidence in that several crises happened to hit at the same time -- California power, New England heating oil, OPEC/Iraq?

RM_DanP: Watch out for tight gasoline this summer.

youngoak-guest: Have any diversified energy funds and/or fund managers significantly distinguished themselves from the pack yet, or has energy been so hot that some of the top funds may just be skating on beginner's luck?

RM_DanP: There are some new funds, but most run by people that have watched energy for a while.

RM_DanP: It is never beginner's luck when you've had to wade through the 1998-99 downturn. I suggest you look at the funds that have a five-year tenure ... the numbers won't lie.

CSEonTSC: On the sell side, I have my favorites -- for example. I really like this Pickering guy in Houston . . . seems to know his stuff!

gastranger-guest: Dan & Chris, what drove the wellhead-SoCal "basis" so outta whack in December? How is pipeline transport priced/sold?

RM_DanP: Strong demand driven by weather was the start. Competing demand in other Western states added to the situation

RM_DanP: Inability to get gas from Southern CA to Northern CA added fuel to the fire. Then there was shutdown of other power generation (maintenance and problems) that left the gas-fired power as critical ... making demand inelastic.

gastranger-guest: Where does California go from here? The governor talks about 5000MW new generation capacity by summer, but where will he get the gas if the plants do get built?

CSEonTSC: He can find the gas, for a price... and, of course, that will remain a major issue. However, that generation will help, but not solve the supply problem.

sonodoc-guest : What are Gov. Davis' chances at re-election?

CSEonTSC: Lights out

CSEonTSC: Seriously, I think it depends on how he solves the crisis, if he can. He has moderated his position. What I think I can say is that I think the way he has handled the situation will severely limit his national political appeal.

RM_DanP: If the people in California ever realize what a difficult situation they are in, he is toast -- a personal opinion -- the public always looks for someone to blame.

TheStreet-gues0 : Thanks Dan and Chris for a great hour! Any final thoughts?

RM_DanP: Thanks for the opportunity to participate. Energy promises to be an interesting place to be in 2001. It's cyclical and it feels like the relatively early part of the up-cycle. Watch the warning signs for overcapacity and good luck making money!

CSEonTSC: First, a BIG thank you to Dan Pickering. Seriously, when I first started covering the energy sector, Dan took me under his wing and helped me learn the ropes. So, thanks for that and thanks for joining us today. The energy markets will remain exciting. Stay tuned to TheStreet.com and RealMoney for all the latest. Hope to see you again soon. And, now, go buy a dozen roses and head home to your spouse. Happy Valentine's.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: deepenergyfella who started this subject2/17/2001 4:16:11 PM
From: Raymond Duray
   of 1715
 
Hi deepenergyfella,

Here's a NY Times article that talks a bit about gaming the California markets:

nytimes.com

"California's Panic Was Moneymaker for Energy Sellers"

<snip>
Mr. McIntosh, the scheduling director at the power agency here and a 29-year veteran of the regulated electricity world, recalls being invited by a group of out-of-state energy companies to a Colorado resort five years ago for a "pick-your-brain" conference on how deregulation would work.

"They had a group of M.B.A. types out there that were already figuring out how they were going to make money in the California market," said Mr. McIntosh, who came back to California and wrote a memo to his bosses at Pacific Gas and Electric about the session.

"These guys are going to eat our lunch," he said he recalled writing. "And the rest of California's. And they have."


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have an associate who has had many years of experience with the California power market. When I wrote to him in late January inquiring about the crisis at the Cal ISO:
caiso.com
he replied in a cryptic yet crystalline fashion --"What crisis?"

Thanks for providing the thread and all the great links in the original post to start the thread. I do have a favor to ask, however, and that is that those who are providing copies of press information provide the URLs for the same. Two reasons are so that I may seek out related articles that other sites can provide (the LA Times has a terrific series of articles, BTW) and the second reason is that, from time to time, some posters have been known to "doctor" documents (remember EMLX?) and it is best to get back to the originating source on as much web based information as possible. The California energy situation is clouded in a sea of disinformation and obfuscation, in accordance with Sun-Tzu's prescription in "The Art of War", and the best we can do it to try to seek the best information we can from trusted sources. TIA

Best, Ray :)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: deepenergyfella who wrote (36)2/17/2001 6:28:47 PM
From: Angler
   of 1715
 
This extract is excellent. One can learn a great deal from listening in on these conversation pieces. I did.

I certainly have a better view of what went on and what is coming on.

As for the revelation of the lack of gas transmission capability between Northern and Southern California, this would not be a problem for the San Francisco area (which stays cool during the Summer) but would certainly impact the central valley areas and the other end of the South Peninsula where Silicon Valley resides.

Angler

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: deepenergyfella who started this subject2/18/2001 12:47:46 AM
From: Raymond Duray
   of 1715
 
From the "Well Isn't this Precious" Dept.:

latimes.com

The LA Times reports today that there is a move afoot in the CA legislature to cut the cojones off the alternative energy industry:

.
Lawmakers have been working for weeks to keep rates in check by lowering the price utilities pay to producers of solar, wind and other alternative energy.
State negotiators believed they had reached an agreement in principle last month to cut the producers' price from 17 cents to 7.8 cents per kilowatt-hour--a reduction that would dramatically help efforts to avoid further raising rates. But those negotiations have slowed and the chief negotiator, state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta), is now looking to lower the prices to the range of 8.5 to 9 cents


The absolutely shameful thing about this is that alternative energy amounts to waaaayyy less than 5% of California's energy generation and is responsible for 0.00% of the recent huge spike in prices in California energy market. What chutzpah on the part of the Dynergy/Duke/Enron cabal, who are only interested in creating further pinchpoints and "corners" in the California energy market. This summer, when we hit 100 degrees in San Francisco some day (most likely in early May), we're going to see the full power and rath of monopolist capitalism at its ugly best. Should be a really interesting show.

And, of course, Wall Street is rushing in to collect its vig for the whole mess:

.
Finally, there are the revenue bonds the state would allow the utilities to float to recover their debt. The bonds would technically be corporate bonds, but they would be paid off with yet another surcharge on utility bills--a so-called "dedicated rate component"--which would also have to be guaranteed.
Because all the bonds contemplated as part of the state's rescue plan are revenue bonds not backed by the state, but by money from ratepayers, they will not increase California's outstanding tax-supported debt of $24.55 billion. Nonetheless, California will spearhead the sale of all the bonds with the exception of the utilities' debt bonds, and will want to ensure they are successful to preserve the state's reputation, Angelides said.
Angelides said Friday that he had selected a huge team of 26 financial firms led by J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. to formulate and help market the $10 billion in bonds. The team represents more than half of those who applied to get a piece of the issue, the largest in American history. "It's a gold rush," said one Wall Street analyst.


Welcome to the Brave New World of the Power Century.....

Best, Ray :)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: deepenergyfella who started this subject2/18/2001 2:36:57 AM
From: Raymond Duray
   of 1715
 
An Editorial Opinion from a Real Industry Observer:

newsdata.com

Select "Bearing Down" to get to the article, reprinted here for posterity:


[January 15 2000 / No. 963]
2001: Eminent Domain? Muddling Through May Not Be Enough

Now that I've tweaked my home life with local conservation shots (unplug the laptop at night, turn off the printer when not in use, wait until bedtime to run the dishwasher, downsize 24/7 bulbs again), it is time to turn to more global circumstances as a late New Year memoir of the ongoing Western energy market crisis. It's no news to note that there are both short- and long-term problems. My take at this point in mid-January is that if short-term problems are not dealt with soon and effectively, long-term problems will consist almost entirely of picking through the ruins left by the implosion/explosion of short-term problems.

Newswires are buzzing with energy summits and declarations. But a crisis needs something more pointed at action than at gathering and jawboning. For example, when you go to court for injunctive action, you are asking the court to order immediate maintenance of the status quo. If events are, in the belief of the petitioner, spinning out of control, a court proceeding would be beside the point unless the worsening problem is stabilized.

Governor Gray Davis is the loudest voice in all of this, and he can scarcely be blamed for the volume of his agonizing, if not always the substance. Governors Gary Locke and John Kitzhaber are concerned that their states are aboard a foundering energy boat that California has caused to ship water. Davis calls among other things for two action remedies: eminent domain seizure of deregulated California power plants and creation of a public generating resource development agency.

There are less draconian measures being recom-mended. NRDC's Ralph Cavanagh in a new report on "The Western Electricity and Natural Gas Crisis" calls for ramping up California energy efficiency/renewable efforts, involving states other than California in the problem, guarding against solutions that degrade the environment and getting more relief for low-income citizens. Governor Locke says he will ask the 2001 Washington legislature for authority to promote renew-ables investments with sales tax credits, grant utility tax incentives for low-income assistance and provide tax incentives "to aluminum companies to invest in locally sited power generating facilities, reducing companies' reliance on Bonneville power."

I saw some of this coming. There is of course nothing miraculous about being a little ahead of the curve when you work as a weekly columnist delivering yourself of a more or less serial stream of topical opinions year after year. Perhaps I'm not as accurate as a stopped clock twice a day, but the odds are still not bad. In March of 1996, I wrote: "I favor free markets and open competition, which these days is something like favoring the law of gravity, but not every aspect of a competitive environment is the beneficial result of an efficient market doing what a market does best. The history of markets is not only the history of developing efficiency, but also the history of warping market situations to unfair advantages--even trying to corner the market and get monopoly rents." [[Note: I agree with Mr. Noe in this one. The California fiasco should be a warning to all free market zealots of the destructive potential of unfetter capitalism.]]

But I went on to note that it "is not always easy to sort out genuinely appropriate market behavior from questionable strategies that seek (often unfair) advantage." My main concern in that 1996 column was the possible effect of futures contracts on the stability and efficiency of the power market; a large part of the current crisis is a failure to hedge. I cited the British experience of "a situation in which market players who have operational control of resources become invested in power deliveries at a future date certain, whether long or short."

I continued, "The British experience suggests that when such a circumstance obtains, there may well be strategic outages of generation resources, which have the effect of driving prices toward a desired future goal covered by contract." I also wondered in connection with organizing power pools how manipulations of supply would be handled. I am still wondering five years later how (to get specific) manipulation of supply relates to meeting load in the new "competitive" system operator environment.

The California deregulation experiment didn't in its formative years do anything much to relate demand to supply. Too much else was going on. The grand and rococo negotiations that preceded the unanimous passage by the legislature of the dereg measure--a festival of win-win fantasies if ever there was one--was most probably influenced by the model of "making the deal" for a blockbuster film in Hollywood. [[With an equally small dose of reality involved. <gg> ]] Money, money everywhere, real and prospective: deals and side deals and side-side-deals; perks; residuals; percentages; walking-around money; scripts; subsidiary rights; billings; foreign rights; videotape; advances; promotion; casting and cuts. It takes, one famous director said, three years to make the deal and one year to make the film.

During the run-up to the great dereg supermarket opening in April 1998, the CPUC authorized a communications coalition to tell the deregulation tale to the people of California. The budget ran to $90 million and included videotapes in 13 different languages telling Californians, in effect, that nobody really knew what was in the offing. It might be time to release those tapes again.

The California-West competitive market situation might well have been less chaotic had there been a surplus of generation pitting one sharp pencil against another. But there was no surplus; now as it turns out, the West is on the cusp of a power shortage from top to bottom except maybe in British Columbia. Moreover, the actual total electric generating resource freely available is not a firm figure in these uncertain times, even without the sudden maintenance stand-downs that have been occurring at inopportune times in the Golden State.

How can we build our way out of this situation? There isn't much choice, of course, but the first and immediate task is to work the demand side both through the DSM (Demand Side Management) Cavanagh suggests and through a variety of curtailments. Hopes for a boom in building generating resources, moreover, may not be realized unless builders are persuaded of useful returns on investments.

The net effect of the huge profits power marketers have been earning has been to attract an enormous lot of negative attention. Such profits are clearly not in the public interest, and the market that made such windfalls possible will surely be diminished one way or another.

The operative word for investors might more properly be a guaranteed rate of return, as in the old days of PUC regulation. The only way to build into power surplus may be to do so under regulatory authority that guarantees a rate of return. However, without the possibility of rate-basing, which financing occurs only in ongoing energy billing transactions, it is difficult to know how such subsidized financing might be made to happen. The call for a state-run agency (or a coalition of munis) to build resources is plausible and worth more discussion.

Governor Davis calls for California "to take control of our own energy destiny." But Davis's State of the State speech cried out that California had been damaged by carpetbaggers ("out of state profiteers") and wailed that there is something unspeakable about a situation where "on many days, 10 to 12 percent of the electricity generated in California leaves our state." The profiteering would of course be reprehensible even if done by that rare bird, the native Californian, and transmission into the state also runs out of the state. So to speak.

Ralph Cavanagh in his report says "these issues increasingly are national in character, but the impacts in California are especially grave and immediate." But that does not mean that this is California vs. the rest of the West. An adversarial viewpoint in the Northwest is based on the belief that California's egregious mistakes are being unfairly visited on her interconnected neighbors. The truth of course is that whatever gets worked out has to respect the interests of all states involved.

I see some merit in Governor Davis's using eminent domain powers because the current market situation is unstable and at risk of moving out of rational control. I have no insight as to how this legal action might work, but the intention would be to preserve the status quo. The Western power market has been corrupted against the public interest, perhaps by chance, perhaps by intention and more likely by some of both. Efficient and rational markets do not have these kinds of manic mood swings.

There may be legislative solutions that could also create a stabilized situation. But right now the Western power market system puts the stability of the interconnected electric industry infrastructure at risk. The system still had the lights on as I wrote this column a couple of days before press time, but as I edited it the next day, California had gone to Stage 3. The market is not likely to heal itself by muddling through, and the West already has seen businesses closing and utility systems on the financial brink. Action to hold the immediate line is necessary as soon as possible, before an event of severe weather that could cascade the Western system into load-shedding disaster [Cyrus Noë].


Cheers, Ray :)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: deepenergyfella who started this subject2/18/2001 12:08:34 PM
From: Roger A. Babb
   of 1715
 
Thanks for a great resource thread on the California crisis. See Subject 50828 for a discussion of the national implications and opportunities.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: deepenergyfella who started this subject2/18/2001 12:14:47 PM
From: Bearcatbob
   of 1715
 
Video Request of Solution to California Natural Gas Crisis!

Dear Fox News,

Large Test Flare for News Affect to be Visible Around Feb 22.

Last week Anadarko Petroleum announced a deal to acquire Berkely Petroleum of Alberta, Canada. Berkley is leading a consortium to develop very large deep natural gas reserves in California near Bakersfield at East Lost Hills. The first well went is on stream at approximately 13 mmcfd. The next well will test flow test around Feb. 22. A successful test will produce a large flare (flame) that would make spectacular video.

Scoop the networks - this is real!

Bob


« Previous Message

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: James R. Barrett who wrote (33)2/18/2001 5:50:03 PM
From: Ben Wa
   of 1715
 
Deport illegal aliens from California. A smaller population uses less energy. Alternative is to put them on treadmills like hamsters in order to generate electric power.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: Ben Wa who wrote (43)2/18/2001 9:48:21 PM
From: Roger A. Babb
   of 1715
 
Ben Wa, the problem is defining aliens. I suspect the native tribes would have a different definition than I would. And the Sasquatch might think the native tribes to be alien....... We are all immigrants! Ronald Reagan made a comment back in 1980 about deporting aliens and the next day received a package from a native American chief which contained a one way ticket to Ireland.

It won't happen in my life time, but someday I hope the human race comes to the realization that we all reside on a single planet and that all people are of equal value. Maybe it was necessary, but the death and pain we inflicted in Iraq last Friday pained my heart. Can't we just all get along????

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)
Previous 10 Next 10