Man, it's gonna take decades for Venezuela to recover from the damage Chavez and his minions have inflicted.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23954514
QuoteA power cut has left 70% of Venezuela without electricity, including parts of the capital Caracas.
The blackout disabled traffic lights in the city, causing traffic chaos. It also partially disrupted the underground transport system.
Thousands of workers were sent home. Power was slowly being restored in different areas after the cuts.
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro blamed the opposition for "sabotage" to power transmission lines.
"Everything seems to indicate that the far-right has resumed its plan for an electrical strike against the country," he said in a tweet.
But critics say poor management and the failure to invest in infrastructure are to blame.
Authorities say they are working to re-establish services, and they will give priority to transport in Caracas.
The oil industry has not been affected by the power cut, as Venezuela's oil refineries are powered by separate generator plants.
In 2010 the late President Hugo Chavez signed a decree declaring an "electricity emergency" to help his government tackle power shortages.
Although Venezuela has big oil reserves, it is dependent on hydro-electricity for some 70% of its power.
The far-right in the U.S. broke our economy, sabotaged the government, and destroyed our infrastructure. I believe him.
Quote from: Ideologue on September 04, 2013, 01:48:37 AM
The far-right in the U.S. broke our economy, sabotaged the government, and destroyed our infrastructure. I believe him.
It's not like we ever had rolling blackouts in the US caused by market manipulation.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 04, 2013, 07:38:16 AM
It's not like we ever had rolling blackouts in the US caused by market manipulation.
:lol: Oh, Enron. :D
Does anyone have a link to an article that makes the case that Enron caused California's electricity problem?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 10, 2013, 05:00:04 PM
Does anyone have a link to an article that makes the case that Enron caused California's electricity problem?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/enron-caused-california-blackouts-traders-say (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/enron-caused-california-blackouts-traders-say)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 10, 2013, 05:00:04 PM
Does anyone have a link to an article that makes the case that Enron caused California's electricity problem?
I'll do you one better than a link. Go rewatch
The Smartest Guys in the Room.
Quote from: citizen k on September 10, 2013, 05:10:23 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 10, 2013, 05:00:04 PM
Does anyone have a link to an article that makes the case that Enron caused California's electricity problem?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/enron-caused-california-blackouts-traders-say (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/enron-caused-california-blackouts-traders-say)
That article says the blackouts happened because the California state agency that manages the grid initially refused to pay Enron the price for the transmission rights that Enron had acquired at auction.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on September 10, 2013, 08:39:52 PM
I'll do you one better than a link. Go rewatch The Smartest Guys in the Room.
I have become deeply skeptical of the veracity of films that cover controversial incidents.
It is true that:
1) the Cal system for scheduling and trading electricity was flawed, and
2) Enron exploited those flaws for profit.
Whether that exploitation rose to the level of market manipulation is a legitimate question.
However, the line of causation to the power outrages is very weak.
In particular, the mechanism decribed in Citizen K's article - overscheduling of load - does not seem to be a plausible mechanism for blackouts. If anything it would tend to cause an excess of power to be available.
A more plausible contributor was retail price control in place at the time, which prevented consumption from responding to tight supply conditions.
My interpretation was that Enron was not actually moving that much power through the portion of the line they owned; rather that they were booking booking paper deals that gave the appearance of congestion and allowed them to charge higher fees to parties that had actual power they needed to move.
Based on the evidence presented in this thread I conclude that Enron's shenanigans exacerbated the situation but did not cause the problem in its entirety. The article specifically mentions blackouts caused in Northern California caused by a blockage of power moving from south to north. However, the original, pre-Enron narrative was that the state legislation (which capped retail rates and forbade the power companies from buying wholesale power anywhere other than the spot market), combined with a drought in the Pacific Northwest (from which California has historically imported hydro electricity) and a surge in air conditioner usage (little foggy on this one) were the drivers of the crisis.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 11, 2013, 02:01:47 PM
My interpretation was that Enron was not actually moving that much power through the portion of the line they owned; rather that they were booking booking paper deals that gave the appearance of congestion and allowed them to charge higher fees to parties that had actual power they needed to move.
That's right but the generating capacity was still there to provide supply.
The consequence of Enron not actually taking the power they booked was that more would be theoretically available to supply others.