Mr. Pullins, Dr. Silverio:

 

Thank you for your kind comments. Just a couple of quick observations:

 

1.      I don’t quite agree that nothing is being done about integrating distributed generation to the grid. In a recent survey of 150 utilities we found that 80% of IOUs, 70% of Municipals and 50% of Cooperatives already have DG connected to their distribution (not transmission) grids. They mostly report that these connections are causing no problems. Admittedly, these connections represent only a small percentage of the 150,000 Mr. Pullins postulates. However, the technology for such connections is in place and more probably can be made without greatly adverse effects. After all, this is an engineering problem and utilities are very good at solving engineering problems. 

 

There may be few long-range plans for much more robust numbers of connections, but that likely is because the existing development of alternative energy doesn’t justify building out for something that may never present a major issue. If 150,000 connections developed, the technology exists to solve the problems of stability and reliability and only needs to be employed on a larger scale.

 

2.      With regard to good ideas dying at the utility/commission staff interfaces, I don’t disagree at all. In fact, I consider that as proof of the argument in my original post, and as both the crux of the issue and the fly in the ointment of Dr. Silverio’s, and other bloggers’, restructuring proposals. My educational training actually is in history and that’s why I consider this a fascinating time-period in which to live. 

 

Over the last couple of generations, the U.S. has become increasingly socialist (regardless of the party in power) and people increasingly expect the government regulate everything and solve every problem. The issue with that is that government bureaucracy (and state-controlled enterprises are extensions of that bureaucracy) is inherently the worst possible way to solve any problem. You can ask the Russians what a long, slow dive into an empty swimming pool feels like. Of course don’t pay to much attention to what they say because now they seem intent on climbing, dazed, back up onto the board and trying it again. 

 

When you introduce government planning into any operation at any level of government (local planning commissions and their interventions into private property are a nightmare) and remove or distort economic incentives, you produce a horse designed by a committee—it looks a lot like a camel. Add politics (most state regulators are elected and national politicians’ raison d’etre is to get elected regardless of the consequences) and the possibility of allowing free markets to work out problems via trial-and-error disappears.  

 

During so-called “deregulation,” not one regulator or one “staff,” which by Mr. Pullin’s description constitutes the bureaucracy, disappeared. Don’t blame the staffs, they’re just doing what bureaucrats do!