Power grid is stressing out, U.S. says Federal report finds competition has degraded reliability

MSNBC Jan. 7  Next time you turn on the lights, think about this: A new federal study of power outages last summer has concluded that the reliability of the U.S. power grid has been "considerably eroded." A big factor, it found, is that utilities that used to cooperate are now fiercely competitive.

'If lawmakers don't act they should be held collectively accountable for what happens to the grid.' NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL

THE FEDERAL government opened up competition in 1996, the idea being to lower electricity prices and save consumers money. Today, some 163 million Americans in 24 states have what proponents call the "power of choice". Unfortunately, an Energy Department task force said in its interim report on power outages, that has also meant "some utilities have adopted a strategy of cost cutting that involves reduced spending on reliability."

Moreover, competition has also meant that it's harder to figure out who's responsible for reliability.

"The overall effect," the report noted, "has been the infrastructure for reliability assurance has been considerably eroded."

The report also suggested the problem will get worse unless corrective action is taken. Power quality and reliability "are increasingly important in a society that is ever more dependent on electricity," it noted.

Aging infrastructure and increased demand for power have strained many transmission and distribution systems to the point of interrupting service ... (and) stressing the electrical system, the report added.

TRANSMISSION ISSUE TOO While the task force focused on distribution of electricity from utilities to customers, the industry has been ringing alarm bells over another reliability issue that could disrupt the nation's electricity flow.

The North American Electric Reliability Council, an industry group, last month wrote to the House Commerce Committee, stating that last summer's power outages show "we are facing a real and immediate crisis."

The council, whose members operate the transmission of power across the country, warned that "we may not be able much longer to keep the interstate electric grids operating reliably."

Utilities "who used to be cooperate voluntarily under the regulated model," it added, "are now competitors without the same incentives to cooperate with each other or comply with voluntary reliability rules."

LEGISLATION, INCENTIVES On both transmission and distribution issues, federal legislation is seen by many as the solution to the downside of unbridled competition.

After receiving the interim task force report Tuesday, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson urged Congress to enact legislation aimed at increasing the reliability of the power grids.

The task force itself suggested states and the federal government provide incentives so that utilities "maintain and upgrade" their reliability infrastructure.

"The problem is not that we have not learned from past outages," the task force wrote. "Rather, it is that in many instances, we have not taken the necessary steps to design and implement the solutions."

Rep. Tom Bliley, R-Va., is a key player as chairman of the House Commerce Committee. An "Electricity Competition and Reliability Act" has been stuck in committee even though he's warned that "without measured comprehensive federal restructuring legislation, all the benefits of competition will not accrue and those benefits will not reach all consumers."

The key, he added, is to pass legislation that "improves reliability and ensures open and robust competition."

But the complexity of the bill might have kept some lawmakers from focusing on it, and it's also embroiled in the traditional controversy of state vs. federal rights.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY Joining the call for legislation is the Natural Resources Defense Council. Ralph Cavanagh, codirector of the conservation group's energy program, calls the reliability issue a "major problem" because there's no central authority to control the flow of power on the nation's grid.

"The fundamental problem," he said, "is that we have reliability policemen around the country who don't have the authority to issue speeding tickets and people are starting to speed."

The NRDC favors a central authority, along with a stronger role for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, to keep grid users in line. "Competitors all have an incentive to maximize their own benefit," he says, and that means gridlock and power outages unless someone's there to monitor the grid.

The group also argues that incentives for utilities to be more energy efficient would ease gridlock, reduce power outages and even save money.

Up until 1994, energy efficiency funds were required by state regulators but restructuring has eliminated that, Cavanagh notes.

Federal legislation could address that, Cavanagh argues, "but what's been missing is a risk associated with doing nothing."

"If lawmakers don't act, he adds, "they should be held collectively accountable for what happens to the grid."

PUBLIC INPUT VIA WEB The Energy Department task force, made up of government and academic experts, looked at problems in Chicago, New York City, Long Island, New Jersey, the mid-Atlantic and southeastern areas.

The department is taking public comments on the issue through the end of January on its Web site at tis.eh.doe.gov/post/comments.html .

The interim report is available at tis.eh.doe.gov/post .

-- Kathy Davis (saveyourstuff@stockpile.com), January 07, 2000

Answers

The Natural Resources Defense Council is a collection of idiots, right up there with the Union of Concerned Scientists. They are anti-free market and generally EXTREMELY environmentally radical. They'd probably like everybody to go back to the stone age and shut down all the power plants.

They're "concern" is nothing to worry about.

-- Gary S. (garys_2k@yahoo.com), January 07, 2000.

the natural resources defense council, whom we've supported for nearly 10 years, is one of the most prestigious organizations of scientists and concerned citizens anywhere in the world. thank God for organizations like them! we don't contribute to many groups, but they are one we'll contribute to unitl we can no longer afford it.

the union of concerned scientists is another group we support. may i suggest anyone looking to help preserve our failing environment do the same.

-- lou (lan@springmail.com), January 07, 2000.

Thanks, Kathy.

I beg your partdon sir! The NRDC is committed to seeing that the air, water and natural resources of our planet are not eroded any worse than they already are. NRDC is *not* anti-free market. But they are for corporations being enviornmentally responsible for pollution they create, or communities they disrupt.

I'm on a rural co-op and very few of the members are interested in the cheaper electric service. Competition usually means cutting corners, downsizing employees and cutting services.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), January 07, 2000.

I was suprised to learn in the last few days that California has the 5th largest power grid in the world (or just U.S.?) Connecting with PG&E can be found on my website. I did my best to rake the utility over coals, after finding out what the "profit motive" meant as to keeping the system up and healthy. If other electrical companies are similar to cutting back on safety and maintainence in order to make a buck, then we truly are in trouble down the road.

-- johno (jobriy2k@yahoo.com), January 07, 2000.

As I was saying to Meno just this morning, "is it true that Y2K was never really any-'thing' in itself or could it be that we don't understand our technology well enough to determine what was-or-is Y2K?" Meno replied, "O Socrates, indeed, what really is a 'thing'?

I said, "Meno, stop asking your usual stupid questions and listen up. A 'thing' is anything that .gov chooses to regulate. 'I regulate, therefore I am.' Someone who comes after me may make some use of that wise saying .....

(to be continued)

-- Socrates (Gymnasium@Athens.Org), January 07, 2000.

Thank you Kathy. Good info.

-- Michael Erskine (Osiris@urbanna.net), January 07, 2000.

Kathy: Do you like to mudwrestle?

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), January 07, 2000.

Sounds to me like the govt is scrambling for excuses. Blame someone else, how original.

-- cin (cinlooo@aol.com), January 07, 2000.

The idea that NRDC is "radical" is absurd.

Many of the foundations that fund establishment groups such as them are heavily invested in polluting industries.

NRDC is a big proponent of utility deregulation.

They also helped with the "linguistic detoxification" of a group of ozone-layer-depleting chemicals during the Ronald Raygun era. Renaming chemicals as not CFCs when they are CFCs is not good for your grandkids skin!

Only two more decades (more or less) till the end of the oil era.

see www.dieoff.org and www.hubbertpeak.com

-- mark (earthfirst@destroyotherplanetslater.com), January 08, 2000.