4 ms·

No family was paying this price, this is a wholesale price that utility providers paid. Individual rate-payers have various types of contractual structures tha

No family was paying this price, this is a wholesale price that utility providers paid. Individual rate-payers have various types of contractual structures that set what price they pay. In many Texas cities, the local utility is owned by the municipality and rate increases require a ballot issue, such as here in San Antonio where CPS is currently trying to get a 3.65% rate increase approved on the ballot. My utility bill didn't go up at all during last February, nor did the bills of the vast vast majority of Texans. The only individuals who had an increase to pay were customers of a company called Griddy that charges wholesale live pricing to customers, which is generally a discount, but it's customers taking a risk that a price spike may occur. Those customers entered into that agreement with a full understanding they were paying the live wholesale rate at all times for power and consequently Griddy had a very small number of customers compared to other utility offerings that use contractual set rates. It's a tiny fraction of truth blown out of proportion in the national media that Texan individuals had to pay $9k/kWh. That simply didn't happen for nearly anyone.

sixothree 5y ago
Seems odd choice to blame the customer here.
- tristor 5y ago
  Why? These customers made a choice in a setup specifically designed to allow them to make a choice. Rather than take any of a number of other providers that offer contractual rates they specifically chose a provider that charges live wholesale rate. During most of the time that saves them money, but it also means during these events it costs more money. The flip side is these customers kept their power on while millions of Texans went without power for up to a week which resulted in hundreds dying. They and their families got to get through a weather crisis with power service many others didn't have, but they had to pay the going wholesale rate to do so, just as they agreed to in their contract. Considering that 99.999% [0] of Texans didn't take this deal, it seems unfair to act as if this is a "trick", it was a calculated bet this small number of consumers made and they ended up losing the bet. [0]: Lest you think I'm being sensational, here's the formula: ([1]/[2] = ~0.001, or .1%). [1]: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Griddy-texas-electricity-retailer-power-market-15974433.php https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Gri... [2]: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/TX https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/TX
  - sixothree 5y ago
    Just curious, what industry specifically do you work in? I find it odd that you spend this much time trying to convince me it's a customer's fault their $150 monthly bill is suddenly $20,000.
    - tristor 5y ago
      I don't understand this question? Seems in bad faith, like a subtle dig you think I'm a shill. Taken at face value: I work in the tech industry, have never had any association to the energy sector. I believe in basic personal accountability and the bounds of reality, which unfortunately makes me a rare individual in the current era.
kccqzy 5y ago
That doesn't resolve the problem at all; it just shifts money around. If the wholesale price of electricity was set to $9000/MWh but utilities continue to charge lower prices do you expect them to just absorb the difference? Of course not. From the article: > The Legislature approved the issuance of what will likely end up being about $5 to $6 billion in bonds to pay back some of these costs. That form of borrowing creates an obligation of about $200 for every adult and child in Texas. No, most families didn't pay $9000/MWh during the event. But they will pay for it in the form of future taxes or fees charged by the utility.
- tristor 5y ago
  True, but they will be paying for it any way you slice it. A thing happened, it had a cost, and the cost was paid by shifting money around using government power, fundamentally that power is derived from taxation. There's a ballot issue locally to increase electrical rates by 3.65% to cover the bond payback, if it's rejected the utility (which is government owned) /still/ has to pay the bonds back, it just does so by cutting budget elsewhere or shifting money and increasing taxes elsewhere. Any way you slice it, the cost must be paid. What's your alternative proposal? A hindsight 20/20 review would have obviously said to not have such a crisis happen in the first place through proper preparation. That didn't happen, and here we are. How do you pay for it? A key piece is that due to load-shedding, the actual cost to most Texans is significantly lower than had they "kept the lights on" at $9k. Instead, we all lost power and the price was paid only to maintain the necessary generation to recover the grid without a black start that would have been a much larger disaster. Electrical power is common infrastructure, and the cost to sustain it is a common cost, raising that in such a way seems the most reasonable path forward. I'm not happy about my rates going up or my taxes increasing, but I also understanding reality. The net effect on me as a rate payer is still far far far less than had I agreed to pay live wholesale like the tiny fraction of people on Griddy.

sixothree 5y ago

Seems odd choice to blame the customer here.

tristor 5y ago
Why? These customers made a choice in a setup specifically designed to allow them to make a choice. Rather than take any of a number of other providers that offer contractual rates they specifically chose a provider that charges live wholesale rate. During most of the time that saves them money, but it also means during these events it costs more money. The flip side is these customers kept their power on while millions of Texans went without power for up to a week which resulted in hundreds dying. They and their families got to get through a weather crisis with power service many others didn't have, but they had to pay the going wholesale rate to do so, just as they agreed to in their contract. Considering that 99.999% [0] of Texans didn't take this deal, it seems unfair to act as if this is a "trick", it was a calculated bet this small number of consumers made and they ended up losing the bet. [0]: Lest you think I'm being sensational, here's the formula: ([1]/[2] = ~0.001, or .1%). [1]: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Griddy-texas-electricity-retailer-power-market-15974433.php https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Gri... [2]: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/TX https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/TX
- sixothree 5y ago
  Just curious, what industry specifically do you work in? I find it odd that you spend this much time trying to convince me it's a customer's fault their $150 monthly bill is suddenly $20,000.
  - tristor 5y ago
    I don't understand this question? Seems in bad faith, like a subtle dig you think I'm a shill. Taken at face value: I work in the tech industry, have never had any association to the energy sector. I believe in basic personal accountability and the bounds of reality, which unfortunately makes me a rare individual in the current era.

kccqzy 5y ago

That doesn't resolve the problem at all; it just shifts money around. If the wholesale price of electricity was set to $9000/MWh but utilities continue to charge lower prices do you expect them to just absorb the difference? Of course not. From the article: > The Legislature approved the issuance of what will likely end up being about $5 to $6 billion in bonds to pay back some of these costs. That form of borrowing creates an obligation of about $200 for every adult and child in Texas. No, most families didn't pay $9000/MWh during the event. But they will pay for it in the form of future taxes or fees charged by the utility.

tristor 5y ago
True, but they will be paying for it any way you slice it. A thing happened, it had a cost, and the cost was paid by shifting money around using government power, fundamentally that power is derived from taxation. There's a ballot issue locally to increase electrical rates by 3.65% to cover the bond payback, if it's rejected the utility (which is government owned) /still/ has to pay the bonds back, it just does so by cutting budget elsewhere or shifting money and increasing taxes elsewhere. Any way you slice it, the cost must be paid. What's your alternative proposal? A hindsight 20/20 review would have obviously said to not have such a crisis happen in the first place through proper preparation. That didn't happen, and here we are. How do you pay for it? A key piece is that due to load-shedding, the actual cost to most Texans is significantly lower than had they "kept the lights on" at $9k. Instead, we all lost power and the price was paid only to maintain the necessary generation to recover the grid without a black start that would have been a much larger disaster. Electrical power is common infrastructure, and the cost to sustain it is a common cost, raising that in such a way seems the most reasonable path forward. I'm not happy about my rates going up or my taxes increasing, but I also understanding reality. The net effect on me as a rate payer is still far far far less than had I agreed to pay live wholesale like the tiny fraction of people on Griddy.