Federal Reserve

Irreconcilable Differences?

Imported natural gas contains more Btus and fewer impurities than the domestic variety, raising questions for LNG development.

While the gas industry is not yet ready to admit it, there may be a high price to pay to deal with the differences that come from an increase in imports of natural gas from overseas. But the alternative of not paying to avert a natural gas crisis would be irreconcilable.

Business & Money: The Back-to-Basics Valuation Squeeze

An analysis of the strategic implications of the re-basing of power and utility industry valuations.

Many utilities are again focusing on perhaps the most viable, broad-based and credible growth strategy: mergers and acquisitions. Combined with supportive regulatory policies, the derived consolidation values of scale, cost-savings and synergies can be leveraged to benefit the public interest as well. Considerations of shareholder value and public policy require it.

The New CEO's

Michael G. Morris

Interviews

For Public Utilities Fortnightly's 75th Anniversary CEO issue, the magazine looked to the horizon and asked these new captains about the planned course for their companies, and for an entire industry.

Frontlines

The United States must turn overseas for natural gas supplies, in spite of worries about energy independence.

Frontlines

The United States must turn overseas for natural gas supplies, in spite of worries about energy independence.

Demand Response & Reliability: Follow the Fed Model

Regional demand resource banks, based on the Federal Reserve Bank system, would make for greater use of customer demand response mechanisms while ensuring long-term resource adequacy.

Regional demand resource banks, based on the Federal Reserve Bank system, would make for greater use of customer demand response mechanisms while ensuring long-term resource adequacy.

Demand response is the only resource available to electricity markets that is not plagued by long lead times, severe regulatory scrutiny, and environmental concerns.

Frontlines

The commission may find it's powerless on capital finance and credit issues. <p><b class="hook">Some say that without Alan Greenspan attending the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's</b> (FERC's) Jan. 16 and Feb. 5 technical conferences on capital availability for energy infrastructure and energy market credit issues, the commission will have few options other than market enforcement and the design of fair and competitive markets</p> <p>In announcing the conferences in Washington, FERC declared its interest in clarifying the state of capital available to energy markets and infrastructure. But what, if anything, can the commission do to support the embattled energy merchant and energy trading space during its current credit crunch?</p> <p>Certainly, FERC's concern is understandable. What's the point in designing an energy market that has no participants? Furthermore, the commission is all too aware that illiquid wholesale markets don't end in "just and reasonable" prices.</p> <p>The issue is timely, with wholesale energy markets in a rather bleak state (see <i>"Energy Markets: Down but Not Out,"</i> on p. 18).</p> <p>Yet, given that FERC has no congressional authority to shore up confidence in markets by providing liquidity to avert a collapse in the sector, as the Federal Reserve did during the 1997 stock market crash, what can the commission do?</p> <p>The agency can provide performance-based ratemaking to attract infrastructure projects and their financiers in the area of transmission. In terms of energy markets, the commission can also develop a standard market that inspires investor and industry confidence. As everyone knows, properly designed markets would attract more market players and financiers, and thus provide liquidity.</p> <p>But FERC may have to face that it cannot bail out the industry from its current credit problems. Credit ratings analysts already predict a grim year for utilities.</p> <p>Fitch Ratings believes that a debt crisis will dominate the U.S. power sector in 2003 and could last well into 2004. "Companies that specialize in the sale of wholesale energy are coping by stretching out debt maturities, retaining the assets they can manage, shedding the rest, and hoping they will stay afloat long enough for energy demand and prices to strengthen," according to a Fitch report.</p> <p>Of course, FERC's inquiry opens up the controversial issue of whether the government should bail out the industry. Given events in the airline industry recently, the prevailing wisdom in Washington is that markets for airline transportation and power will have to sort themselves out.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p class="center"><b>Articles found on this page are available to Internet subscribers only. For more information about obtaining a username and password, please call our Customer Service Department at 1-800-368-5001.</b></p>

FERC: Lender of Last Resort?

The commission may find it's powerless on capital finance and credit issues.

Some say that without Alan Greenspan attending the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC's) Jan. 16 and Feb. 5 technical conferences on capital availability for energy infrastructure and energy market credit issues, the commission will have few options other than market enforcement and the design of fair and competitive markets

Cut the Pay-Out, Boost the Buy-Back?

The pros and cons of dividend pay-out reductions and stock repurchase programs in uncertain economic times.

The pros and cons of dividend pay-out reductions and stock repurchase programs in uncertain economic times.

The Dow Jones Utility Average currently stands at its lowest level in five years. Electric and gas utilities, along with U.S. companies generally, have been consistently lowering their payout ratios over the past several years, and that downward trend is projected to continue. What do these facts portend for utility investors in the near future?

Energy Trading & Marketing: The Evolution of the Deal

Energy traders and risk managers reengineered their business dealings to manage against unexpected political and financial risks posed by California and Enron in 2001.

The rules of energy market survival changed forever in 2001. California and Enron were both humbled by gyrating prices and blackouts in the Golden State, and financial misadventure dethroned the once-crowned king of energy trading. These twin events sent shockwaves through the very foundation of the energy trading and risk management establishment.