Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/texas...eeze/ar-BB1dOkgd?ocid=msedgntp One lady now faces a 6k power bill, and the disaster isn't over yet
Isn't this price-gouging?
I don't understand this. Aren't utility rates regulated? How does this work in Texas?
In Texas, they can pick their energy provider. The energy providers buy in bulk from the energy generators that run the power plants and wind mills then resell it to customers for a mark-up. Usually there's a set per kw/h price but it varies by provider. I used to live in Texas and still have family there. Griddy is a provider that, for a nominal fee, passes on the actual cost of the electricity to the customers. While most utilities would have that per kw/h allowable charge and would sort of even it out over the course of the year, Griddy literally exposes the customer to the full charge. These people picked Griddy in hopes that they'd be able to save a lot of money on power by using very little power during expensive times (generally the day during the summer) and more during the off times. Now there's more demand for electricity than generation and the per kw/h rate is high to entice electricity generators to provide additional power. So no there's no regulation and no this type of "utility" shouldn't actually be allowed. Sometimes regulation is there to protect you from yourself. Heat during a sub-zero winter event isn't the kind of thing that should be subject to market forces like a used car. Heat in the winter, A/C in extreme temperatures, and water (along with other basic utilities) are fundamental human rights and needed to live. As such, "Griddy" would not even be allowed to operate in most states. At this point, these people either have to shut off the power to their entire home from the breaker box or risk bankrupting themselves.
Anonymous wrote:I wonder if this is going to be a tipping point to get rid of some of the Republican leadership in Texas unfortunately memories are short when it comes to elections
just remember people this is the price you pay for low taxes and lack of regulation.
Anonymous wrote:https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/texas...eeze/ar-BB1dOkgd?ocid=msedgntp One lady now faces a 6k power bill, and the disaster isn't over yet
Isn't this price-gouging?
I don't understand this. Aren't utility rates regulated? How does this work in Texas?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
That’s the point! Nobody has a system with 100% backup. What you have is reserve margin which acts as what you’re calling backup. The storm knocked out the reserve margin. There isn’t a system in the US is built to withstand a 4 standard deviation event. Everybody wants to act like you can just plan to this event, but it doesn’t work that way anywhere in the country.
No. What people are saying is that if the generators, in areas like Dallas, had undertaken standard winterization measures and Texas paid for emergency capacity, like the rest of us do, then they would not have been minutes away from a total grid collapse on Sunday.
What this shows is the inherent problems and limitations of an energy only market. That energy only market is the cause of the problem. It does not handle emeegency situations very well.
+1
There were several states facing the exact same temperatures, and they all fared better. So no matter how many standard deviations the pp wants to imply,it's factually wrong to say that nobody else was prepared. I mean, Louisiana did better. Let that sink in.
No on all counts.
Capacity markets also experience blackouts during extreme weather events (see 2020). Both energy and capacity markets have limitations bc nobody is built to withstand extreme events. The same temps on an objective basis are meaningless in different regions because regional systems are built for regional climates. That Texas could handle 40 straight days over 100F in the summer is meaningless to the fact that the DMV could not handle it bc Texas is built for Texas historical conditions as DMV is built to DMV historical conditions.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
is it cheaper to prepare for disaster or weather the storm?
First, think of the wasted productivity with millions offline and focused on survival.
Then, think of all of the damage to the infrastructure
Then, think of the damage to private property
Then, think of all the overtime for first responders and DPW types
This is billions of dolllars.
Yes, ask the people of Texas whether they would rather spend a few dollars more every month to prepare or whether they would rather take their chances and go through no heat and boiling water for days on end.
Clearly they favored the latter, as this is how they voted. Don’t blame the politicians, blame the people that voted for them and/or didn’t vote.
And yet, I'd be shocked if anyone in Texas changes their vote over this.
A few million pissed off suburban moms with $10,000 power bills plus the burst pipe costs will.
I’m not holding my breath. They will find some way to overlook it. God! Guns! Abortions! Owning the libs!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
is it cheaper to prepare for disaster or weather the storm?
First, think of the wasted productivity with millions offline and focused on survival.
Then, think of all of the damage to the infrastructure
Then, think of the damage to private property
Then, think of all the overtime for first responders and DPW types
This is billions of dolllars.
Yes, ask the people of Texas whether they would rather spend a few dollars more every month to prepare or whether they would rather take their chances and go through no heat and boiling water for days on end.
Clearly they favored the latter, as this is how they voted. Don’t blame the politicians, blame the people that voted for them and/or didn’t vote.
And yet, I'd be shocked if anyone in Texas changes their vote over this.
A few million pissed off suburban moms with $10,000 power bills plus the burst pipe costs will.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
is it cheaper to prepare for disaster or weather the storm?
First, think of the wasted productivity with millions offline and focused on survival.
Then, think of all of the damage to the infrastructure
Then, think of the damage to private property
Then, think of all the overtime for first responders and DPW types
This is billions of dolllars.
Yes, ask the people of Texas whether they would rather spend a few dollars more every month to prepare or whether they would rather take their chances and go through no heat and boiling water for days on end.
Clearly they favored the latter, as this is how they voted. Don’t blame the politicians, blame the people that voted for them and/or didn’t vote.
And yet, I'd be shocked if anyone in Texas changes their vote over this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
is it cheaper to prepare for disaster or weather the storm?
First, think of the wasted productivity with millions offline and focused on survival.
Then, think of all of the damage to the infrastructure
Then, think of the damage to private property
Then, think of all the overtime for first responders and DPW types
This is billions of dolllars.
Yes, ask the people of Texas whether they would rather spend a few dollars more every month to prepare or whether they would rather take their chances and go through no heat and boiling water for days on end.
Clearly they favored the latter, as this is how they voted. Don’t blame the politicians, blame the people that voted for them and/or didn’t vote.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
is it cheaper to prepare for disaster or weather the storm?
First, think of the wasted productivity with millions offline and focused on survival.
Then, think of all of the damage to the infrastructure
Then, think of the damage to private property
Then, think of all the overtime for first responders and DPW types
This is billions of dolllars.
Yes, ask the people of Texas whether they would rather spend a few dollars more every month to prepare or whether they would rather take their chances and go through no heat and boiling water for days on end.
Anonymous wrote:https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/texas...eeze/ar-BB1dOkgd?ocid=msedgntp One lady now faces a 6k power bill, and the disaster isn't over yet
Isn't this price-gouging?
I don't understand this. Aren't utility rates regulated? How does this work in Texas?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:is it cheaper to prepare for disaster or weather the storm?
First, think of the wasted productivity with millions offline and focused on survival.
Then, think of all of the damage to the infrastructure
Then, think of the damage to private property
Then, think of all the overtime for first responders and DPW types
This is billions of dolllars.