Electricity bills going once, going twice...

Without being able to completely explain the energy company procedures and practices, I won't try, but I will say that deregulation has never produced lower prices for consumers. It has produced higher profits for stockholders, however. Invest wisely.

Thanks, Julie. CUB is a great organization and is always going to bat for the consumer. I urge everyone who can to donate to them. They really are on our side.

Isn't Exelon, the parent company, talking about bankruptcy for ComEd unless they get what they want, too???

Maybe they should consider lowering the dividend they pay before considering bankruptcy??

/Oh, maybe they don't want to do that because the Officers of the company own so much stock?

Here's some interesting news:
January 25, 2006 - Exelon Announces Strong Operating Results; Records $1.2 Billion Charge against Goodwill; Illinois Commerce Commission Approves Electricity Procurement Plan
Exelon Corporation’s (Exelon) fourth quarter 2005 consolidated loss prepared in accordance with GAAP was $844 million, or $1.26 per share, compared with earnings of $363 million, or $0.54 per diluted share, in the fourth quarter of 2004. Full year 2005 consolidated earnings prepared in accordance with GAAP were $916 million, or $1.35 per diluted share, compared with $1,864 million, or $2.78 per diluted share in 2004.

I remember when Excelon and/or ComEd were running those "Paid for by concerned citizens of IL or some crap" ads saying Illinois was on the brink of a California style energy crisis if we didn't move to the auction method. What a bunch of propagandic bullshit. I trust a energy companies about as far as I can throw the nucluear waste they produce.

i just think it's fucking sick bullshit that companies who provide necessary resources for our own human survivial in our advanced society are more in the business of ripping off its customers for it's own capitalist gain than judiciously providing these services to customers at affordable rates. CTA, People's Gas, Comcast, SBC, NOW ComEd? Even though I didn't like that most of their energy comes from nuclear generation, at least it wasn't ungodly expensive and you didn't cry or curse when the bill came!

You might not have liked them, but I was one of those Greenpeace canvassers a few years ago asking you on the street to donate to a Clean Air Campiagn, because this type of shit is appauling and we really need to start investing in renewable sources.

I'm surprized and glad to also see the headline that the city is gonna try out Wind Turbines. But really wind turbines in the city? I don't think it will look to good, or function too well. We got so much rooftop space that we just need to cover them with solar panels and we'd totally save and produce enough energy.

Also, I have always thought that gyms and fitness centers need to hook up their cardio machines to generators to supply the electricity for the block. So many people running nowhere seems silly unless were producing energy and burning the fat off our bellies at the same time.

Demand for electricity continues to grow as the city and its economy grows. Years ago, most of the power used by Chicago--and other major cities in the midwest and east coast--came from coal-fueled power plants (coal is burned to generate the electricity). But that played havoc with air quality, so Congress passed the Clean Air Act. Long story short, companies that owned coal-fired generation had a choice: spend billions (literally) to fit the coal plants with equipment that would reduce the pollution; or retire the coal plants and spend millions building gas-fired plants that didn't have emissions problems.

What would you do? You would retire the coal-fired plants and build gas-fired plants. The utilities liked the solution. The environmental lobby liked the solution. Everyone was happy. The problem was, every utility that had coal-fired plants thought this way, and so everyone starts to build gas-fired plants. Gradually the demand for natural gas builds to the point where suddenly people--companies, Wall Street, tree huggers, regulators--realize that the supply of natural gas is not limitless and given our consumption rate, we're going to run out of it much sooner than anyone had thought.

So you're ComEd. You've planned to get all your power from gas-fired generation so that everyone can run their computer, home entertainment center, amplifier, A/C, refrigerator, and washer at the same time, plus you're not fucking up the air with nasty shit from the coal...but suddenly your costs to make that power (whether you're making it yourself or buying it from someone else) has gone through the roof because of natural gas prices...oh and wait, the price you can sell it is fixed...for nine years...

Here's a deal for you: you run a business selling bike tires. Everyone needs a bike tire because everyone rides a bike. You are not allowed, by law, to change the price you charge for a bike tire...now the cost you pay for each tire goes through the roof...sound like a good business? No it sucks for you. And your friends and family that loaned you the money to start the business and expect repayment.

As a consumer, if I'm paying the same price for power for nine years...why in the world to I care about conserving energy (except for being environmentally conscious)? But I have to pay market rates for electricity, I'm not going to leave every light in the house. I'm going to invest in energy efficient appliances. I'm going to run by A/C a little less in the summer. I'm going to install energy efficient windows. I'm going to change my demand pattern. And this is what will ultimately bring prices back down.

We want to have cheap power? Then we need to think about this realistically. Natgas-fired generation is great for the air quality, but it comes at a price. Nuclear-fired generation is super clean and super cheap, but it's been 20 years or more since anyone was able to build nukes, and what do we do with the spent fuel rods? Coal-fired is cheaper right now than gas, but produces nasty by-products. Windmills aren't reliable enough yet. Which one do you choose, because their a trade-offs with each one.

I'm not saying the reverse auction is the way to go, but for fuck's sake, can we at least engage in some honest discussion about the situation? Oh, and on the subject of those company executives are fucking us, yadda, yadda...the biggest shareholders of Exelon are people like us. People who have their 401ks or IRAs invested in mutual funds that own Exelon shares. Sure the executives get rewarded when the share price increases; that arrangement started across corporate America years ago to align mangement's interests with those of the shareholders. Not to say it works, but just think about who ultimately owns these companies.

Not that I don't enjoy political corruption stories, but WTF does the reverse auction have to do with Enron or an Enron-like situation? Are you saying that Exelon is hiding massive off-balance sheet debts through a variety of fraudulent measures? Are you saying that Exelon's auditor is certifying its financial statements when it knows there are material issues? Enron had nothing to do with political corruption; it was management and auditor corruption. The only noteworthy political aspect of Enron was that the feds flatly refused to help the company.

I like the cronyism charges and all, but it still doesn't address the underlying economic issues of this matter: we've been paying fixed rates for a commodity that cost way more than it did 9 years ago.