Who’s on first?

LOL!!!!!

At the risk of being accused of trying to “seek a monologue and ad hominem attack?”, I must say I agree with Robert: 

“This article is based on several serious errors.”
………………
“Enviro policies spike CA electricity prices 70 percent”?

First, it ain’t just California.  Wholesale prices for electricity increased in every one of the lower 48 states. Some areas increased by more than California. 

Second, most of the price increase was not California “enviro policies”. It was natural gas price increases, just like the rest of the nation. 

Third, the implication seems to be, at least it appeared that way when I first saw the headline, a 70% increase in retail rates. This seems to be reinforced in the next to last paragraph, that the wholesale price increase is “equivalent to 6 cents per kilowatt-hour at the retail level.”, which is now 15.2 cents per KWh. 

I would feel safe in wagering that in the next year, retail electrical prices will not increase by 7%,  let alone 70%. 

The glass is at least half full. 

PS, what happened to Firehost? They used to blogblock me whenever I used my phone. My computer only made me “wait or moderation”.

Your calculated 6 cents per kilowatt hour potential price increase is correct. That would reflect about 40% to 50% of the average residential retail price of 12 cents to 15 cents per kilowatt hour. But it depends on who is buying the wholesale power. The municipal power companies probably will not be the buyers. The regulated utilities – Edison, PG&E, and SDG&E are likely buyers because of the cutback in power from San Onofre.

My article tried to just stick to what the ISO reported.

Demo’d forever because of folks like Robert not understanding what is really going on … the future is dark folks.

John,

Not to beat your dead horse, but the “previous” price would have been about $40 MWh. ($6 is 15% of 40).  If you look up wholesale prices, they have varied from about $20 to $70 (or more)  They show gradual changes over a long period, and, sometimes, radical changes from day to day. 

And you are correct, a $6 change per Mwh would be 6 tenths of a cent  per KWh, not 6 cents.  But, remember, this is the WHOLESALE price. 

On 12/04/12, the California weighted average wholesale price was $43.87 per MWh. 

On 12/03/11, it was $33.35 per MWh. 

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/wholesale/

Thats a huge increase (in WHOLESALE prices) . Did you notice a huge decrease in your utility bill in December 2011? I didn’t. 

Wholesale prices are set by a lot of factors, and show some very wide swings. Check out some of the other area electric costs. Retail prices are set by the PUC, and are MUCH more stable. 

By these figures, $43.87 per MWh would be about 4.39 CENTS per KWh thats WHOLESALE. 

And the average retail price is about 15 cents per KWh. 

MOST of the increase in wholesale prices is increased natural gas cost (and NOT just in California). SOME of the increase (the whole point of this article) is from “state’s greenhouse gas cap-and-trade program”. 

In any case, I guarantee you, your retail electric rates will NOT increase by 70%. 

So the glass is still at least half full. 

Not to beat this “dead horse” too much further, I believe my calculations were correct as they related to the article published. I didn’t look up the original ISO report, but as I read it, if the $6.00/MWh was 15% greater than the price during the previous period, the cost during the previous time period would have been about $5.217/MWh [1.15X = $6.00/MWh; therefore, X = $5.217/MWh]. As 1.0 MWh = 1,000 kWh’s, $6.00/MWh = $0.006/kWh. The marginal increase was calculated: ($6.00 – $5.217)/1,000 kWh = $0.00783/kWh and when rounded is $0.008/kWh. If the article was revised, a $6.00/MWh increase is a $0.006/kWh increase in wholesale costs ($6.00/1,000). Hopes this helps explain my short hand calculation used in my original comment.

Additionally, I have no conflicts of interest to report. I’m just a private sector retiree working when I have a chance to rid this state of $500 billion per year in regulatory burden. With Brown and crew though it’s getting harder each day to slow down their exponential growth in burden.

Your articles have always been well written and spot on. Not to beat this “dead horse” too much further, I believe my calculations were correct as they related to the article as then published. I didn’t look up the original ISO report. As I read it, the $6.00/MWh was 15% greater than the previous time period; therefore the cost during the previous time period would have been about $5.217/MWh [1.15 X = $6.00/MWh; therefore, X = $5.217/MWh]. Further, 1.0 MWh = 1,000 kWh’s. thus, $6.00/MWh = $0.06/kWh. The marginal increase was calculated as follows: ($6.00 – $5.217)/1,000 kWh = $0.00783/kWh rounded to $0.008/kWh or 8/100’s cent / kWh. Apparently, the article has been revised since I first read it, so a $6.00/MWh increase is indeed a $0.06/kWh increase in wholesale costs. Hopes this helps you understand my short hand in my first comment to your article.

Wayne, I have no conflicts of interest to report. I’m just a private sector retiree working to rid this state of its $500 billion per year in regulatory burden but with Brown and his crew it’s getting harder each day to slow down their growth.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/electricity-luxury-good/story?id=20158621&singlePage=true

How Electricity Became a Luxury Good