4 ms·

The problem is what you suggest would destroy them as businesses. You have just described them doing "just" the parts of their business where they operate at a

The problem is what you suggest would destroy them as businesses. You have just described them doing "just" the parts of their business where they operate at a loss with massive multi-decade debt loads. Generation is the only part of the business that produces the money to fund the infrastructure and the generation is the cheapest part of the business.

dsr_ 9y ago
We used to have this concept that utilities were regulated monopolies. On the one hand, they were told exactly how much they were allowed to charge, and what services they had to provide (and where, and to whom). On the other hand, they were assured that they had no competition and that they would always be slightly profitable. It was good for the stock market, too -- a utility would have exceptionally low volatility and pay regular dividends, being nearly as safe as anything can be. Then we decided to deregulate.
- ianai 9y ago
  I sincerely hope “we” soon develop and master decentralization technology and techniques.
PhantomGremlin 9y ago
Generation is the only part of the business that produces the money to fund the infrastructure and the generation is the cheapest part of the business. To a large extent, that business model is obsolete in many places. For example Consolidated Edison in NYC used to generate most of its own power. Here is a link to a generating station they used to own but were forced to divest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenswood_Generating_Station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenswood_Generating_Station Due to deregulation of the energy markets in New York State, Con Edison was required to sell all of its "in-city" generating stations in New York City including Ravenswood. In 1999, Con Edison transferred ownership of Ravenswood to KeySpan Energy (KeySpan) for $597 million. I think it's stupid, but nobody asked me before they forced this on Con Ed.
- AFNobody 9y ago
  Yeah it is obsolete in many places but the difference between retail and wholesale prices is how they pay for their infrastructure so the driver is still the same model from the perspective of the utility. They were legally forced to sell as well, not due to a lack of profitability.
marcosdumay 9y ago
And the problem is? They have to lobby to start charging for the services they will do in the future. If they don't do that, they will soon have to lobby to get free money from people, and that last one can only end badly.
volkl48 9y ago
An obvious solution to me would be hiking grid connection fees to the point where that part of the business doesn't operate at a loss, then. I would wager that the vast majority of people are still going to need/want the connection.
- AFNobody 9y ago
  At which point you are paying a subscription fee to maintain the infrastructure which will quickly eat up much of the value of decentralization. But yeah, they probably will have to move to that model and disconnect generation from delivery in the same entity.

dsr_ 9y ago

We used to have this concept that utilities were regulated monopolies. On the one hand, they were told exactly how much they were allowed to charge, and what services they had to provide (and where, and to whom). On the other hand, they were assured that they had no competition and that they would always be slightly profitable. It was good for the stock market, too -- a utility would have exceptionally low volatility and pay regular dividends, being nearly as safe as anything can be. Then we decided to deregulate.

ianai 9y ago
I sincerely hope “we” soon develop and master decentralization technology and techniques.

PhantomGremlin 9y ago

Generation is the only part of the business that produces the money to fund the infrastructure and the generation is the cheapest part of the business. To a large extent, that business model is obsolete in many places. For example Consolidated Edison in NYC used to generate most of its own power. Here is a link to a generating station they used to own but were forced to divest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenswood_Generating_Station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenswood_Generating_Station Due to deregulation of the energy markets in New York State, Con Edison was required to sell all of its "in-city" generating stations in New York City including Ravenswood. In 1999, Con Edison transferred ownership of Ravenswood to KeySpan Energy (KeySpan) for $597 million. I think it's stupid, but nobody asked me before they forced this on Con Ed.

AFNobody 9y ago
Yeah it is obsolete in many places but the difference between retail and wholesale prices is how they pay for their infrastructure so the driver is still the same model from the perspective of the utility. They were legally forced to sell as well, not due to a lack of profitability.

marcosdumay 9y ago

And the problem is? They have to lobby to start charging for the services they will do in the future. If they don't do that, they will soon have to lobby to get free money from people, and that last one can only end badly.

volkl48 9y ago

An obvious solution to me would be hiking grid connection fees to the point where that part of the business doesn't operate at a loss, then. I would wager that the vast majority of people are still going to need/want the connection.

AFNobody 9y ago
At which point you are paying a subscription fee to maintain the infrastructure which will quickly eat up much of the value of decentralization. But yeah, they probably will have to move to that model and disconnect generation from delivery in the same entity.