|
 by
Lynn Lipinski
Despite the onslaught of news coverage and political
rhetoric, many of us may still be in the dark when it comes to understanding
California's power crisis. It is a story with more sides than a Thanksgiving
dinner; its heroes and villains are often indistinguishable; and, of course,
the ending has yet to be written.
We do know that after months of Stage Three alerts, rolling blackouts
and looming price hikes, few would call the Golden State's "deregulation"
of electricity a resounding success. Certainly not the state's many business
owners and consumers, who are facing rising electricity prices for an
increasingly unreliable supply.
The water community itself has not been immune to skyrocketing electricity
prices. Metropolitan Water District will see its total power costs for
operation of its Colorado River Aqueduct more than triple this year. State
Water Project power costs will nearly double.
But higher operational costs are only the tip of the iceberg when water
officials talk about the impact electricity deregulation will have on
their own industry. During the last five years, a number of special interest
bills dealing with water rates and the ability to set rates have been
introduced in what many say bears an uncomfortably close resemblance to
what has happened with power.
"There is no doubt there is a serious threat that what happened to
power could happen to water," said Jerry Jordan, executive director
of the California Municipal Utilities Association. "No doubt at all."
The water industry has been watching what's happening with electricity,
strategizing ways to avoid the problems plaguing energy suppliers in the
state. "The lesson we learned from the restructuring of the electricity
industry was that what works in one industry may not work in another,"
Jordan said.
Water is different than power, natural gas, telecommunications, and other
industries that have been deregulated. "There is absolutely no substitute
for water," said Brian Thomas, Metropolitan's chief financial officer.
"While power can be generated in new and different ways, water cannot."
A clean and reliable water supply is an absolute necessity for survival,
particularly in a desert region like Southern California. Providing that
supply for the future takes foresight and long-term planning, efforts
traditionally carried out by public agencies aiming to protect the consumer from
the open market's price volatility and also from supply shortages.
"Open markets are powerful, efficient and ruthless," Thomas
said. "Markets are rarely in equilibrium; they are most often in
shortage or surplus, which can result in rapid and dramatic price swings."
In California, where water shortages are not unknown, Metropolitan and
its 26-member agencies have invested billions of dollars in programs that
extend the useful life of the state's water resources.
"Southern California learned serious lessons from the last drought,"
said Ron Gastelum, Metropolitan's CEO and president. "We increased
our investment in conservation programs and renewed our commitment to
continue these types of programs well into our future. In the past 11
years, we have spent more than $220 million in conservation programs,
$1.2 billion in recycling programs, and increased our water storage capacity
by nearly 600 percent."
Other efforts to increase the reliability of the arid region's water supply
include planning for the coming decreased allotment from the Colorado
River by exploring dry-year transfer agreements as well as facilitating
wet-year storage of water from the State Water Project, which stretches
most the length of California.
These long-range strategies may be in jeopardy, though.
The issue of how to determine fair compensation for water "wheeling"
(moving water from one area to another) has been recently debated in the
California Legislature. While these bills will not likely have any action
taken on them in the near future, the fundamental questions they try to
answer are still important. How should those prices be set? Who should
set them? What costs should be included in price?
Some parties support incremental cost pricing rather than a more comprehensive,
"postage stamp" pricing, in which users of the system pay a
uniform system charge that incorporates system-wide costs rather than
point-to-point costs. These system-wide costs would include the costs
of long-term programs, such as water conservation and recycling.
California State Senator Jim Costa (D-Fresno) is one
of several state legislators watching the water wheeling issue closely.
"Any new wheeling statute should ensure that available space in existing
facilities can be used at a fair price. Setting a fair price should not
include a simple 'postage stamp rate' that paints with too broad a brush.
Wheeling rates should include considerations of the state's broader water
policy and provide incentive for private firms to add to California's
available water supplies," said Costa.
MWD officials believe that using the postage stamp rate, rather than a
point-to-point pricing system, ensures that each of its customers shares
in the costs of long-term programs, such as water conservation and recycling.
This long-range planning is seen as absolutely necessary by many in the
water industry. "One of the biggest mistakes in the (energy deregulation)
process was the removal of the utilities' 'obligation to serve,'"
Jordan said.
"Instead of asking the utilities to plan ahead, to build or procure
sufficient resources to serve their constituencies, they are now obligated
only to connect to the customer and procure power, when needed, on the
spot market," he said. "This more traditional obligation to
build sufficient resources, at least for core customers, must be reinstated.
And when we're talking about water, people need to be very careful before
giving up that long-term planning to the market forces."
Importing water to meet today's needs only solves today's problems. Planning
for a reliable, high quality and affordable water supply for years to
come is vital to the economic health of Southern California.
to
top
|
What
is deregulation anyway?
Economists always discuss the virtues of a competitive marketone
in which there are lots of buyers and lots of sellers. Vigorous competition,
it is believed, puts prices and output at their most efficient levels,
and motivates organizations to innovate and create new and better products.
However, competitive markets in every industry are not always feasible,
leading to what economists call "natural monopolies." "Power utilities
are the classic example of a natural monopoly," said economist Christopher
Thornberg, visiting professor at The Anderson School at UCLA. "To have
a real competitive market for consumers, multiple power lines for the
various providers would line the streets, offering each household multiple
choices for electricity. That's silly of course."
Deregulationwhich in economist terms means the removal of governmental
controls from an industryhas been carried out in the U.S. to varying
degrees, in industries such as railroads, banks, telecommunications, airlines,
and electricity, some more successfully than others. California's recent
electricity deregulation is more aptly described as a semi-regulation
or even a restructuring, as it opened the market for wholesale prices
while freezing retail prices.
Lynn Lipinski



|