Voltage Regulation

Reactive power is the key to an efficient and reliable grid.

Investors are revolting against poor corporate governance, demanding tighter controls that will boost earnings and stock price.

A new wave of activism has risen in corporate America, driven by large institutional shareholders who claim companies have not gone far enough in their efforts to embrace good governance. These institutional shareholders maintain that good governance leads to superior financial performance and will not be satisfied unless the companies do more to implement good governance policy.

A new FERC decision veers away from congressional intent not to burden intrastate pipelines with interstate policies.

State commissions can set intrastate natural gas pipeline transportation rates except when the intrastate pipeline moves gas in interstate commerce. Then, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates the rates under evolving Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA) standards. Two recent FERC orders in a GulfTerra Texas Pipeline L.P.

An analysis of the timing, location, and mix of new capacity additions that may be needed in the future.

It is universally accepted that there is excess generating capacity in most, if not all, regions in the country. Looking forward, several obvious, and interesting, questions arise: (1) When will new capacity be needed? (2) Where will it be needed? and (3) What types of plants will be needed? As any good economist would say, it all depends.

Revisiting performance-based rates with endogenous market designs.

More than 20 years ago in the pages of this publication, economist William Baumol outlined a method by which the regulation of public utility monopolies could be streamlined while simultaneously providing incentives for efficiency and productivity growth.¹ Baumol proposed a productivity incentive clause that adjusts rates automatically according to the formula,

A pseudonymous executive tells why the CCRO's recommendations don't pass muster.

The latest splash from the Committee of Chief Risk Officers¹ (CCRO)-a new white paper regarding capital adequacy for energy companies²-makes barely a ripple. While an improvement over the CCRO's previous efforts,³ the capital adequacy recommendations do not provide adequate standards that can be implemented consistently by energy companies.

Perspective

Two Cato analysts suggest a return to the past-vertical integration, but now with no state regulators.

The defeat of the energy bill in the Senate last year has thrown electricity restructuring back on its heels. There clearly is no consensus among politicians or academics regarding how this industry ought to be organized or how it might best be regulated. Finding our way out of this morass requires a reconsideration of how we got to this dismal point in our regulatory journey.

EU nations are taking slow steps toward an integrated energy market, but they are many paces ahead of U.S. efforts.

Despite recent setbacks in establishing an acceptable balance of voting power among member nations, a new constitution for the European Union (EU) is expected to bring together dozens of separate nations into a single economic and political superpower and lead to an interconnected energy market throughout the European continent-one that will eventually stretch from Portugal to the Baltic Sea and from Ireland to Greece and perhaps beyond.

Technology Corridor

For most energy firms, the returns on investments in customer relationship management have been profoundly disappointing.

Back in the 1950s and 1960s, when big cars were all the rage, energy companies were developing the first systems designed to store and print customer billing data. These early version of the customer information system (CIS), written in FORTRAN and COBOL, ran on massive mainframes. The architectural model was simple.

How to benchmark return on equity (ROE) and depreciation expense in utility rate cases.