Early Results of Restructuring (as of June 2002)
After
California led the way with a comprehensive law in 1996 that started the
restructuring process, several other states followed. (Actually, New Hampshire
passed a restructuring law earlier than California, but implementation
was delayed due to lawsuits by the Granite State's utilities.) By September
2001, 23 states and the District of Columbia had passed comprehensive
restructuring laws, and many were already opening markets for competitive
power sales. In New York, the public utility commission had effectively
created a competitive framework, and in 18 states, legislative committees
and other government organizations had been involved in examining various
restructuring proposals. (See map, below.)
Restructuring Status as of September 2001
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, at http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/chg_str/regmap.html. (Image text retyped for clarity.)
During the first years of restructuring, customers did not necessarily
receive all the benefits promised by the most ardent competition advocates.
In some states restructuring earned a deservedly bad reputation, while
in others restructuring appeared to provide some benefits. And in still
others, it remains too early to declare whether the outcome will be good
or bad. In this essay, I outline the respective bad, good, and undecided
experiences of three states. Because California constitutes the largest
single market for electricity, and because its influence has been the
greatest on other states-for better and for worse-it will receive the
most attention.