[WestieJeff]

I think our electric rates are already reasonable, even cheap on TOU. I'll be voting no.

[kespen]

Here is what my sister told me when they deregulated in Ohio. Things got off to an interesting start. She got calls or visits almost every day from companies who wanted her to sign up with them. Each and every one of them promised a really low rate for six months to a year. And every contract said the rate was subject to 'market prices'- which means after the guaranteed rate, they can charge whatever they want to. The cable and phone companies play this same trick when they offer a low rate for the first year or two. She told me it was worth voting no just to not have to deal with the unwanted sales calls and visits on a daily basis.

I guess there are pros and cons for and against it, but my bill isn't that bad right now, so I'm not voting for it.

[newopty]

Originally Posted by nickydim

This was a nightmare on Long Island and we went through 3 power companies by the time we left there. When it was just the utility LILCO it was easy, one company to take care of needs regulated by a consumer rate commission they would have to beg and justify any rate increases.

When we went with power suppliers AND Power delivery (nvenergy would still do this) it just created 2 complicated layers, each with their own sets of service charges and taxes, which were easily more than the one company. The delivery system rates constantly went up to deliver YOUR CHEAPER ENERGY, yea what a laugh.

My electric and gas bill budget ended up at $390 a month, out of this world rates. I like my Nevada monthly budget rate of $127 thank you very much.

I will be voting NO on this proposition. I want the utility under the thumb of the consumer, and when there is only one company, ALL fingers, residential, commercial and political, point to NVENERGY, and hold them accountable. Try holding many entities responsible. It's easier for the local government to set up rebates, and other promo programs when they only have to deal with one utility too.

NO NO 1000 times NO....

just this mans opinion from experience.

Didn't the fiasco and closing of the Shoreham nuclear power plant have something to do with this?

[nickydim]

Originally Posted by newopty

Didn't the fiasco and closing of the Shoreham nuclear power plant have something to do with this?

It may have and most probably did, thinking it was the solution to an already heavily indebted company.

That whole shoreham fiasco was terrible on all levels. The people of LI didn't want it because a meltdown in the middle of the island would cut the east end off from evacuation, and the secret cost overruns by LILCO were kept on the down low for a long time because of poor design, which ended up costing the plant extra Billions, with a B and plural, to the already huge price tag. And the kicker, when the people finally won, the plant had just been finished and was running a 5% test capacity waiting for approval from the NRC to go online. Can you think of a more wasteful thing. Cost overruns out the wazoo then just as it's finished it never gets to open and cost us an addition 10 million to de-commission it. (The extra irony, is Brookhaven National Labs runs not one but 2 nuclear reactors dead center of Long Island, so the potential for an accident that was so worried about has been there for 40 years).

My memory may be a bit foggy, but I think it's pretty close.

Anyway, my argument was..

Deregulation doesn't work, regardless of why you deregulate.

[Cold Warrior]

Originally Posted by WestieJeff

I think our electric rates are already reasonable, even cheap on TOU. I'll be voting no.

I'm from CA. I'll never vote for electricity deregulation again. NVenergy rates are a small fraction of PG&E's.

[lvmensch]

There is nothing in this that makes the PUC go away.

The present structure puts the PUC in NVEnergy's pocket as was demonstrated by the initial roof top solar fiasco. I got a little trouble expecting Warren Buffett to do the right thing.

My concerns would deal with the ability of NVEnergy to make huge savings in solar and manage to grab most of it by various financial manipulations. i would expect them to do well on the distribution end but we could get a break on the source in a few years. The SW desert is going to be the best place in the US for solar.

My big concern would be the captive assets as they get devalued by solar. Goling to be a problem with or without 3...What NVEnergy will try to do will be to load the asset cost on the clients while collecting the savings from solar.

[soclose]

It’s all about competition.

[Tek_Freek]

Any time I see deregulation my answer is no.

[johninvegas]

Originally Posted by OmegaSupreme

Of course deregulation lowers electric rates. More competition means lower bills.

Yeah, that worked so well when the airlines deregulated. For a while there were cheaper fares, Then the bigger airlines bought up the smaller ones. Then we got charges for baggage, early seating, more legroom, snacks and drinks, carry-on luggage, even charges for buying the ticket.

Not sure that electricity dereg would work the same way, but I'm not interested in chancing it.

[EA]

Typically I am for deregulation. This doesn't seem to be that. This seems to be something else entirely.
My average bill is 65 dollars. I was paying 400~ a month in NC.
I'll stick with 65.