BGE settlement leaves Maryland power options open
In today's story on the BGE settlement, Sen. Jim Rosapepe got the reason for approving it pretty much right. It leaves Maryland options for both deregulation and reregulation.
Rosapepe noted that the settlement would not preclude the state from returning to regulation and urged his colleagues to reverse course rather than jeopardize the rebates."Today, we have the opportunity to approve a rollback of $2 billion of overcharges of ratepayers in the past," he said. "And tomorrow, the fight to end deregulation continues, because nothing in this legislation will stop it."
Insurgent senators wanted to amend the bill by requiring any new electric generation plants built in the state to be regulated by the Public Service Commission. But that would have limited the state's options and deprived BGE customers of a small amount of rate relief, for no good reason. (It would have squelched a quid pro quo in which Constellation agreed to rate relief.) Under required regulation, no generation company would build in Maryland without billing household ratepayers for construction costs. The provision would have effectively stopped Constellation's plans to build a new Calvert Cliffs nuclear plant and probably other projects, too.
As passed, the bill doesn't foreclose the possibility of new, investor-built generators for Maryland. But neither does it keep the state from exploring reregulation -- having BGE ratepayers build their own plant or contracting to buy power and pay the mortgage on a plant built by a third party.







Comments
Hancock , you are a first class jerk , I did what you suggested 18 months ago and went with washington power and light,,,,,,,,,,,now I won't get the $170.00 .....that will be the last time I listen to you..............
Posted by: Jim from Dundalk | April 8, 2008 12:47 PM
It is time for the State of Maryland to begin financing small efficient cogeneration plants built and run by a nonprofit public/private firm. Let's get back to regulating those things that are essential- utilities, health care, etc. I'm sick of paying $500 a month to BGE so some fatcat investor can make a profit off of my trying to light and heat my home.
Posted by: T Brown | April 8, 2008 2:07 PM
Jay -- Thank you for your consistent, informed reporting of this important story. However, in your criticism of the re-regulation amendment proposed by Senator Rosapepe and others you have perpetuated a false impression about allocation of financial risks associated with construction of new powerplants that is quite pernicious. The so-called "merchant model" -- where investors build powerplants on spec and then compete for sales to consumers -- is a myth. No merchant powerplants have been built in the US. Plants are built and financed only with secure commitments from ratepayers to acquire their output -- (1) through long-term contracts to anchor their financing; (2) through government mandates (in the case of renewables); (3) or through vertical integration with distribution entities under state regulation, which is the model proposed for Maryland. Municipal amnd cooperative utilities have had no trouble building and financing these projects. Profiteers like Constellation and its subsidiaries resist this approach because it limits their ability to profit at the expense of consumers. The evolution of the grid will enhance the value of their existing powerplant footprints (locational market power) and add additional profit opportunities, which is why they are fighting regulation. However, consumers need the relief from profiteering that only effective state regulation can provide. Bill Julian, Davis CA
Posted by: Bill Julian | April 8, 2008 2:40 PM
Jay -- Thank you for your consistent, informed reporting of this important story. However, in your criticism of the re-regulation amendment proposed by Senator Rosapepe and others you have perpetuated a false impression about allocation of financial risks associated with construction of new powerplants that is quite pernicious. The so-called "merchant model" -- where investors build powerplants on spec and then compete for sales to consumers -- is a myth. No merchant powerplants have been built in the US. Plants are built and financed only with secure commitments from ratepayers to acquire their output -- (1) through long-term contracts to anchor their financing; (2) through government mandates (in the case of renewables); (3) or through vertical integration with distribution entities under state regulation, which is the model proposed for Maryland. Municipal amnd cooperative utilities have had no trouble building and financing these projects. Profiteers like Constellation and its subsidiaries resist this approach because it limits their ability to profit at the expense of consumers. The evolution of the grid will enhance the value of their existing powerplant footprints (locational market power) and add additional profit opportunities, which is why they are fighting regulation. However, consumers need the relief from profiteering that only effective state regulation can provide. Bill Julian, Davis CA
Posted by: Bill Julian | April 8, 2008 2:40 PM
You people are lunatics. MD rates now match the regional average in a non-regulated market. Further deregulation, real deregulation, will permit many power providers to compete for customers, driving prices lower. The half-assed deregulation permitted by the State of Maryland was doomed to fail from the outset, creating a quasi-monopoly for BGE in its service area. It is that lack of real competition in Maryland, between major regional/national power producers and boutique energy suppliers, NOT deregulation itself, that is responsible for the tremendous increase in rates.
BGE should be forced to compete in the open market.
Posted by: Dan in B-more, hon. | April 8, 2008 6:23 PM
Under Reagan deregulation became the watchword. Ronnie was NOT a braintrust but rather did what big business told hi m to do. Deregulation ruined the airlines, the power companys and now WALLSTREET. Wake up for gods sake! What constellation did is no different from what Enron did!
Posted by: jim cooper | August 1, 2009 9:03 PM
Jim Cooper - So with the power industry regulation is the answer? You make it sound like creating artificially low pricing on a limited commodity will never come back to haunt you. That's pretty short sighted. Truth/reality shouldn't hurt.
That said, the way deregulation was implemented was seriously flawed. The rate cap expiration didn't allow for a reasonable phase-in for people to change their behaviors to deal with the market price of electricity. Katrina didn't help either. In the current-day aftermath it looks like people don't think they can climb out of the hole so they just complain and point fingers while the issues and bills pile up. Unfortunately O'Malley listened, and is furiously digging a deep hole for himself while trying to keep a promise that is unattainable. He shouldn't have sold something that he would lack jurisdiction to deliver. I hope he wakes up from this bad dream soon.
Posted by: Bob UU | August 2, 2009 4:11 PM