3 ms·
I agree that utility bills without upper bounds is a thing that should be covered by consumer protection laws. My point was more that the $9 per kilowatt hour
by elihu 6y ago
I agree that utility bills without upper bounds is a thing that should be covered by consumer protection laws.
My point was more that the $9 per kilowatt hour wasn't even set by extreme market conditions; rather, it was an arbitrary number that someone made up (if Griddy's take is accurate).
Individual people wouldn't participate in a power auction; that's supposedly what Griddy does on their customer's behalf and just sends them a bill for whatever the costs were.
- gizmo686 6y agoIt is a number set by Texas law as the maximum price of electricity [0]. The arguement that the commision used to justify staying with the maximum price seems straightforward: > At various times today, energy prices across the system have been as low as approximately $1,200. The Commission believes this outcome is inconsistent with the fundamental design of the ERCOT market. Energy prices should reflect scarcity of the supply. If customer load is being shed, scarcity is at its maximum, and the market price for the energy needed to serve that load should also be at its highest. [0] Actually, there are 2 maximum prices, and $9/PWh is supposed to be the greater of them. Due to the high price of natural gas, the "lower" maximum turned out to be more expensive, to the commission waved the rule that would have switch to using the other maximum.