What is Howard Dean afraid of?

[dems4me]

Ken, the Final Report established by the Commission in March 2003 - its relatively easy reading at 189 pages. If found utilities drove the price up and market manipulation. It's Issuance No. IssuanceNo. 20030326-0434 in PA02-2. It has since been appealed by the utilities and is now in the 9th Circuit. Happy reading! Pat Wood was supposed to side with the regulators but didn't. He sided with the people of California and FERC.

 

[Bruzilla]

I have to agree with dems4me on the energy issue, especially in regards to ANWR. We would be killing wildlife and damaging the environment, be it in a small way or a big way. Having said that, I must ask why ANWR is any better or different than anywhere else in the US of A that's being developed? We kill wildlife and damage environments on a daily basis, and ANWR is a frozen rock. I would rather see environmentalists fighting to shift digging, mining, and drilling out of key woodland areas and move it all up to the frozen tundra.

What really bothers me is that the people who live their are all saying "drill, drill, drill", while people who live back in NY or CA, and who have never even been to the place, are all fighting against it. It must be nice to have a good-paying job with an environmentalist lobby and telling people who live in an area where there are few jobs what they can or can't do with their resources. Can you imagine a bunch of Alaskans coming to NYC and demanding that two out of every three buildings needs to come down to make room for more white tail deer?

One other thing... I believe that the claims that Caribou are multiplying at higher numbers since the Alaskan pipeline was installed is not a good thing. Anytime that you start increasing the population of any animal, there's going to be a lot of negative outcomes.

 

[dems4me]

Hi Ken, I'll spare you all the reading, you seem like a highly intelligent guy and I'm starting to come to like you. Go to Issaunce 20030326-0458 - its only 14 pages and its the summary of the Final Report, issued on the same day - March 26, 2003. Basically it was a flawed system that the utilitites took advantage of (greed...greed) (after Bush and cronies took office). Unfortunately, it was legal just highly unethical. The utilities drove the prices up on the stock market by rapid-fire trading and churning and high profited as a result, while the people in California, Washington and Oregon faced blackouts and their local suppliers (PG&E and another one) had to file for bankruptcy.

Off the topic, do you know how I get a cute figure or face under my name Dems4me on the Left side? Out of all the faces, I've seen here, I like Kiwilla's its sooo cute!!! I'm hoping there will be one that I can relate to. Thanks

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by dems4me
Hi Ken, I'll spare you all the reading, you seem like a highly intelligent guy and I'm starting to come to like you. Go to Issaunce 20030326-0458 - its only 14 pages and its the summary of the Final Report, issued on the same day - March 26, 2003. Basically it was a flawed system that the utilitites took advantage of (greed...greed) (after Bush and cronies took office). Unfortunately, it was legal just highly unethical. The utilities drove the prices up on the stock market by rapid-fire trading and churning and high profited as a result, while the people in California, Washington and Oregon faced blackouts and their local suppliers (PG&E and another one) had to file for bankruptcy.

Off the topic, do you know how I get a cute figure or face under my name Dems4me on the Left side? Out of all the faces, I've seen here, I like Kiwilla's its sooo cute!!! I'm hoping there will be one that I can relate to. Thanks

I read the 14 page version and will now download the 189 page full report and get back with you.

The cute figure is an "avatar". Go to User Control Panel, select Edit Options. At the bottom of that page you can select Change Avatar and then select any of the 347 preloaded avatars in the system or create your own (size restrictions apply).

 

[dems4me]

neat -- thanks.

When you read the report, you need to read it with an open mind and your eye for detail that you have. Did you really think CA problems was a lack of energy? The Washington Post was carrying issues concernining this case for a while and then backed off.

I hopy you are not slogging through the 189 page report, on my account. I really can't say much on the issue. I hope it is out of your own concerns and interest that you are reading this.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by dems4me
neat -- thanks.

When you read the report, you need to read it with an open mind and your eye for detail that you have. Did you really think CA problems was a lack of energy? The Washington Post was carrying issues concernining this case for a while and then backed off.

I hopy you are not slogging through the 189 page report, on my account. I really can't say much on the issue. I hope it is out of your own concerns and interest that you are reading this.

My mind is open or I wouldn't even read the darn thing. I am reading it to obtain a better understanding of the process (self-education).

I think the California problem was a result of the FERC giving their usual authority to the California regulators and the flawed rules that they established making this all possible, the lack of building generation facilities in the state to keep up with their demand, and the lack of oversight by the Clinton administration.

 

[Ken King]

I have just finished a reading of the report and see this has nothing to do with oil companies, though energy marketing firms (to include ENRON and numerous others) took advantage of the poorly conceived plan in place at the time and boosted profits by using the flawed system to their maximum advantage. As you stated it wasn't illegal, but ethically speaking it was a travesty.

The Executive Summary states, This Report is the culmination of a year long effort by Commission Staff to determine whether and, if so, the extent to which California and Western energy markets were manipulated during 2000 and 2001. While Staff found significant market manipulation, this evidence does not alter the Commission’s original conclusion, set forth in its December 15, 2000 Order, that significant supply shortfalls and a fatally flawed market design were the root causes of the California market meltdown.

The underlying supply-demand imbalance and flawed market design greatly facilitated the ability of certain market participants to engage in manipulation. In addition, the ability to pass through gas prices in electric power prices provided no check on gas buyers’ willingness to pay.

For the first 2 years of its operation, the California market performed well and saved the state’s customers billions of dollars. Only after the Pacific Northwest could no longer provide abundant supplies of low cost hydro-power to the regional market did the negative effects of too little infrastructure and poorly designed market rules adversely affect customers’ bills.

The California problem was a culmination of events that could have been prevented had Clinton's FERC not ceded it's authority to the California regulators.

It also seems that Bush's appointment of Pat Wood as Chairman of the FERC was a good move and not one motivated to give the big energy producers a leg-up. To me it seems that he wanted to fix a problem that had previously been ignored. Seems Bush has spent the better part of his first term doing that, fixing problems left by his predecessor.

 

[Frank]

" and as a democrat he is for the environment and the reservervation of it -- can you imagine not having any trees -- are you SoMd folk really fond of living in a city instead of country? "

You do know that the coastal plain of ANWR is a bleak, treeless tundra that is home to pretty much nothing else other than caribou? It's not ripping up a national forest, it's about as desolate a place as exists on Earth. All of ANWR is bigger than several states combined, and the only region of interest is the coastal plain, which is about the size of Delaware. Of THAT, only about 2000 acres would ever be affected once oil is being developed there.

Thats IT. Out of an area the size of the mid-Atlantic states, they want to drill on a patch of land smaller than Delaware, and use a mere 2000 acres. About the size of an airport. About a fourth of the size of Pax River. All of it. This is NOTHING. There's no reason not to drill there.

 

[dems4me]

Ken -- skip to chapter II or do a search in the pdf version for churning or rapid fire trading. This is not about Enron. If the utilities came away clear with no wrong doing then why are they still filing pleadings with FERC trying to clear their names??? I can't say anything more about this, just try to read this OBJECTIVELY...

 

[dems4me]

also Ken you are splitting hairs here. The energy marketing companies are owned by the utilities and oil companies who in the past have been good friends of Bush and tried to hold a secret energy policy making meeting. They are all related. Kind of Texaco and Chevron Texaco are one and the same.

 

[dems4me]

sorry Ken, I can understand the confusion here. It's not oil, more specifically, it focuses on the electric utility companies. I just clump oil, gas, energy and environment all together. It makes it no less acceptable for this kind of behavior.

 

[Penn]

Howard Dean fires new shot over rivals' bows

Howie accuses his bad-mouthing, mean-spirited, democratic rivals, as well as those in Congress, of being in league with G.W.Bush.......



I still think the one he told us folks last year was a real doozie:

That if Terry McAuliffe was as good a man as Ron Brown was, he'd STOP the rest of the contenders from making the attacks on him.

Shoot: Ron Brown didn't do a d@mn thing to stop the attacks on Clinton back in the 90s'!

Who is this nerd trying to fool? Himself maybe?

 

[Larry Gude]

This has simply gone on...

...long enough.

dems4, if you do what you say you do for a living then you KNOW what happened in California and you KNOW why it didn't happen any where else.

For everyone else, here's a simple, easy reading snap shot of why Gray Davis is gone:

http://www.brunchma.com/~acsumama/com/com020201.html

 

[Ken King]

Dems4me,

I'll concede to your use of the term “oil” as meaning energy, I usually prefer more specifics when discussing things so we know exactly what we are talking about. I can deal with this. But all you keep bringing up is that these companies did wrong. What I am saying is, “Hell yes, they are wrong”, but the law allowed it.

First search of “churning”, beyond the table of contents, took me to chapter II. It goes into the scheme that Reliant was using. Sounds like an illegal practice. That is until you read this little tidbit, “Reliant’s churning did not violate the blanket certificate under which it sold gas because Section 284.402 of the regulations contains no explicit guidelines or prohibitions. We recommend that Sections 284.284 and 284.402 of the regulations be amended to provide explicit guidelines or prohibitions for trading natural gas under Commission blanket certificates. We also suggest a generic proceeding to develop appropriate reporting and monitoring requirements for sellers of gas under Commission certificates.”

I had read this before and it backed my thoughts. And right there in black and white you find that the freaking rules allowed it. These guys figured it out and took advantage of market manipulation. It isn't right, but according to the FERC, it wasn't illegal.

Now under other aspects of FERC laws there have been penalties imposed against these companies for doing something that FERC didn't cover in the rules. Of course the energy companies are appealing. You see, in this country, if it isn't against the law you don't fine someone for doing it.

 

[Penn]

Thanks for the article Larry.
It would appear that the short-sightedness of the California legislature had much to do with the problem they are facing.

Deregulation without the proper ceiling caps, and the dependence on other surrounding states power purchasing.

Take into account the boom of the internet business, and the amount of power it consumed,(which I had not realized), and it gets a little clearer why they are in that predicament.

Not enough powerplants in the state to help offset the demand on the bordering states was also crucial, it seems.

 

[Larry Gude]

Well...

...if the state OWNED all the power companies then we'd never have to worry about evil, greedy things like...profit, speculation, regulation impact, environmental impact, supply and demand.

We'd just turn on the lights and they'd work. All the time. And the price would never go up.