🚀 go-pugleaf

in article 3B04B5AD.254D060A@quiotix.com, Jeffrey Siegal  wrote:

> What price would you suggest?

I think that would be up to those in a position to realistically assess what
is affordable. I'm not personally in a position to set that price.
 
> If you were to refuse to pay more than $60/mWh, you would lose nearly
> all of the natural gas fired capacity, because they simply could not
> afford to pay for fuel (and pollution credits) at that price.

Obviously, you cannot consistently refuse to pay real-world prices. It is no
secret (at least to those in the biz, I would assume) what realistic costs
to generate power under various situations might be. Once we decide what
methods are deemed "affordable", then we can make determinations regarding
acceptable price ranges. And it goes without saying that the retail rates
would have to cover those determinations.

> About 35%
> of the capacity goes offline.  Since nearly 50% of the customers are
> exempt from rolling blackouts for political or technical reasons, the
> rest of us would be subject to "rolling" blackouts 60+% of the time!

Just like we residence customers who have been designated "heavy users" must
pick up the tab increase for fifty percent of the entire base of residence
users.

-- 
John Higdon     | Email Address Valid | http://www.anntec.com/
+1 408 264 4115 |  Silicon Valley, CA | FAX: +1 408 264 4407
  Cheap, provincial San Franciscans can call: 415 428-COWS