Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: 2018 Ballot Question 3 - Energy Deregulation

  1. #1
    TroubleShooter
    Join Date
    22 Mar 2005
    Location
    Carson by day, Reno by night
    Posts
    10,109
    Real Name
    Denis

    2018 Ballot Question 3 - Energy Deregulation

    Support/opposition doesn't seem to follow the usual political lines (Laxalt is for and so is Harry Reid). I'm all for ending monopolies, but I also don't want to pay higher rates as the opposing side seems to suggest will happen if this passes. School me on this issue
    Reno4x4Garage.com - CNC plasma cutting, welding, tube bending and custom 4x4 fabrication - (775) 771-2734

  2. The Following User Likes Dennis's Post:

    Dirty Harry (1 Week Ago)

  3. #2
    I support Reno4x4!
    Join Date
    08 Nov 2006
    Location
    Sparks
    Posts
    1,842
    Real Name
    Jed
    All I know is there are the big casinos pushing one side, and the big energy monopoly pushing the other side. Its hard to sort through both their obviously BS positions and find real facts.

    I suspect if you dig, we'd find CA blackouts and higher rates are due to other factors besides deregulation.

  4. The Following 3 Users Like ManNamedJed's Post:

    69cj5 (1 Week Ago), Dirty Harry (1 Week Ago), maxamillion2345 (1 Week Ago)

  5. #3
    Web Wheeler
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2005
    Location
    Gardnerville, NV
    Posts
    2,730
    Real Name
    Chris
    All I know is that we have 3 locations at work.

    2 in Nevada, and one in Pleasanton CA. Between our 2 manufacturing sites, we use the same amount of electricity but the bill at the Pleastanton office is usually 3.5 times higher than the Nevada plant. (14k per month, vs 4k).

    I talked with a guy in truckee a couple of weeks ago that had the best explanation i have ever heard. NV Energy owns all the infrastructure, so no matter what they get the wet their beak on ever single transmission over their lines. Add their fees on top of "Cheapo new electric company" fees, and all the other associated taxes and fees, and you will end up paying more. ALOT more in the end.

    I don't like the idea of a monopoly but I do like the idea of it being regulated so that I don't end up with an $800 electric bill in the summer months like some friends of ours that live in San Diego.

  6. The Following User Likes GloNDark's Post:

    Dirty Harry (1 Week Ago)

  7. #4
    I support Reno4x4!
    Join Date
    27 Jun 2008
    Location
    Sparks
    Age
    53
    Posts
    1,556
    Real Name
    Mark
    Below is an interesting article. Obviously you have to be careful about who/where you get your source of news for this and other issues, but it seems reasonable and offers some insight into what may happen.

    https://thenevadaindependent.com/art...y-deregulation

    Some older but relative info.

    https://www.smartenergy.com/energy-deregulation-101/
    https://www.electricchoice.com/map-d...nergy-markets/

  8. The Following User Likes 69cj5's Post:

    Dirty Harry (1 Week Ago)

  9. #5
    I support Reno4x4!
    Join Date
    08 Nov 2006
    Location
    Sparks
    Posts
    1,842
    Real Name
    Jed
    AT&T also owned all the phone lines and infrastructure. Breaking them up and opening it up for competition sure improved landline phone service and cost.

    Anyone remember when a 30 min long distance call would cost you $15? Remember when you had to 'rent' your phone from the phone company?

  10. The Following 2 Users Like ManNamedJed's Post:

    69cj5 (1 Week Ago), CashMoney (1 Week Ago)

  11. #6
    Web Wheeler
    Join Date
    08 May 2008
    Location
    spanish springs
    Posts
    2,145
    Real Name
    Conrad
    Quote Originally Posted by GloNDark View Post

    NV Energy owns all the infrastructure, so no matter what they get the wet their beak on ever single transmission over their lines. Add their fees on top of "Cheapo new electric company" fees, and all the other associated taxes and fees, and you will end up paying more. ALOT more in the end.

    I don't like the idea of a monopoly but I do like the idea of it being regulated so that I don't end up with an $800 electric bill in the summer months like some friends of ours that live in San Diego.

    This.

    I can't imagine it making it enough better to justify reading the entire bill and finding out the specifics and whether they are even legal or not and how much legal fees will hike the rate anyways. Plus why put it into the state constitution?

  12. #7
    Wheeler
    Join Date
    23 Feb 2013
    Location
    Whites Creek
    Age
    50
    Posts
    290
    Real Name
    Tom
    You have to realize the sun does not shine at night and the wind here is not good for wind power. This means that we still have to have the power plants like today to meet customers needs. Big wind and solar is really just a way to launder tax payers money right into the democrat coffers . I did a lot of research on big wind when they were pushing it in Illinois, poor wind resources and now they are pushing big solar there as well. Lots of cloudy days there. Big federal and state subsidies push these projects and they need laws like question 3 on the books to force people to buy a bad product. Like said above the power companies own the lines, they really don't care who's power runs down the lines as long as they get paid for the transfer. For those that don't like monopoly power companies I suggest you cut the cord and get a generator and a solar system and see how long it is before you go back to the reliability of the grid. And don't ask your neighbors to pay it for you.

    NO! ON QUESTION 3 AND ON QUESTION 6

  13. #8
    Web Wheeler
    Join Date
    04 Jan 2007
    Location
    Reno
    Posts
    2,343
    Real Name
    Brizz
    I remember 20 years ago when the last places did it. Their rates went way up very quickly. The ads aren't lying when they say the rates will go up. They ALWAYS have EVERYWHERE that deregulated.

    DON'T FOLLOW CALIFORNIA! If you want California, move there. Don't bring their shit here!
    Brizz

    Be careful infringing on peoples 2nd amendment rights with your 1st amendment rights, because you probably wouldn't like it the other way around.

    FJ-40 on 37's, locked/posi. Stock Grand Cherokee.

    Looking for 68-74 FJ-40 doors.

  14. The Following 2 Users Like Brizzman's Post:

    SilverBob (1 Week Ago), slopoke (1 Week Ago)

  15. #9
    Wheeler
    Join Date
    27 Jun 2005
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Age
    40
    Posts
    104
    Real Name
    Matt
    I am not for Question 3, but there is a lot of bad information here.

    The infrastructure is a moot point. The PUC and FERC will still regulate the transmission rates, as they always have. NV Energy can't just charge whatever they want to stick it to you. NV Energy has never had to be a very forward thinking or dynamic company because they are a monopoly, and we pay the price for that in many areas.

    It is not a fair point to say that rates went up in deregulated states across the board because ALL rates went up over time, even in regulated states. Saying otherwise is an intentionally misleading lie or sheer ignorance. Here is the breakdown:

    States whose costs rose at LESS than the national average post deregulation (saved money): Maine, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Texas
    States whose cost rose at the same rate as the national average (within 0.1 cents per kWH) (no change post deregulation): New York, Montana
    States whose costs rose MORE than the national average post deregulation (lost money): Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Delaware, Maryland, Michigan, California

    So of the 16 states who deregulated, 6 saw cheaper prices, 2 didn't change, and 8 saw increased prices when compared to the national average. The Governor's energy committee report indicated that NV would save about $1.1 billion per year with deregulation. I'm not encouraging a vote one way or another, but please have the proper information in front of you before making your decision.

  16. The Following 5 Users Like FeCamel's Post:

    69cj5 (1 Week Ago), Dennis (1 Week Ago), Dirty Harry (1 Week Ago), LEKCAH38 (1 Week Ago), ManNamedJed (1 Week Ago)

  17. #10
    Newbie
    Join Date
    14 Oct 2016
    Location
    Reno
    Posts
    20
    Real Name
    Justin
    Quote Originally Posted by FeCamel View Post
    It is not a fair point to say that rates went up in deregulated states across the board because ALL rates went up over time, even in regulated states. Saying otherwise is an intentionally misleading lie or sheer ignorance.
    https://www.eia.gov/electricity/mont...p?t=epmt_5_6_a

    Kansas’ actually dropped .02 per kW/h (not $2) over the last year, so not ALL states rates go up over time.

    While I completely agree with most of what you said, I’d like to know where you got your breakdown info from. The link above will show info all the way back to “issues prior to 2011,” and there are discrepancies with between the gov reports and the info you’ve shared.
    Last edited by LEKCAH38; 1 Week Ago at 07:00 PM.

  18. The Following User Likes LEKCAH38's Post:

    Dirty Harry (1 Week Ago)

  19. #11
    I support Reno4x4!
    Join Date
    01 Jun 2014
    Location
    Carson Valley
    Posts
    554
    Real Name
    Glen
    I had first hand experience with California's version of deregulation. Our utility bills went up... and up. No thanks. From the article quoted earlier, this statement is quite telling:

    Nevada probably isn’t large enough to form its own wholesale market, and could either start a new market with other southwestern states or join up with California’s Independent System Operator Corporation, or California ISO.

    Chaset said he believed Nevada could be comfortably nestled into California ISO, with the close proximity of Las Vegas to the state and the physics and infrastructure of a merger matching up. He said the biggest potential hurdle was the likely political and governance issues that would come from latching Nevada onto a much larger state’s wholesale energy market.

    Several committee members expressed concern that Nevada could become a “blip” on the radar to the market, given the vast difference in size between the two states. Chaset said he was confident some sort of shared governance structure could be found.

    “I don’t think anyone would want to join us if it’s just ‘We’re going to be along for the ride with California’,” he said.
    I've already been "along for the ride" with California. My wallet and I will pass this time, thanks.

  20. The Following User Likes grumpyoldretiredcop's Post:

    tahoe1028 (1 Week Ago)

  21. #12
    Web Wheeler
    Join Date
    08 May 2008
    Location
    spanish springs
    Posts
    2,145
    Real Name
    Conrad
    Quote Originally Posted by LEKCAH38 View Post
    https://www.eia.gov/electricity/mont...p?t=epmt_5_6_a

    Kansas’ actually dropped $2 per kW/h over the last year, so not ALL states rates go up over time. .
    That's scary. Really scary.

  22. #13
    Newbie
    Join Date
    14 Oct 2016
    Location
    Reno
    Posts
    20
    Real Name
    Justin
    Quote Originally Posted by wrenchjunkie View Post
    That's scary. Really scary.
    Care to elaborate?

  23. #14
    Web Wheeler
    Join Date
    08 May 2008
    Location
    spanish springs
    Posts
    2,145
    Real Name
    Conrad
    The misunderstanding and wanton relaying of misunderstood information is what makes the internet a information cesspool. That coupled with very little practical reasoning. You oughta be able to look at your own electric bill, be freaked the hell out by the thought of paying near a dollar per KWH, and think "how the hell could it go down 2 dollars?", and then realize the info says "cents per KWH" right in the header , before relaying false info.


    Or it was a typo and I had a shitty day at work and just wasn't up to choking down another shit sandwich without bitching about it and I apologize.

  24. The Following User Likes wrenchjunkie's Post:

    LEKCAH38 (1 Week Ago)

  25. #15
    Newbie
    Join Date
    14 Oct 2016
    Location
    Reno
    Posts
    20
    Real Name
    Justin
    Ha! Now I understand your comment! Yeah I fuckered that up, read the “cents per kW/h” then typed the wrong thing. Point was it went down. It went down .02 a kW/h because there was settlement with west star. http://https://www.google.com/amp/amp.kansas.com/latest-news/article215058390.html
    Last edited by LEKCAH38; 1 Week Ago at 07:06 PM.

  26. #16
    Wheeler
    Join Date
    20 Feb 2007
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    301
    Real Name
    Cary
    Quote Originally Posted by wrenchjunkie View Post
    The misunderstanding and wanton relaying of misunderstood information is what makes the internet, Twitter etc. a information cesspool. That coupled with very little practical reasoning. .
    Fixed it for ya...

    I couldn't agree more.

  27. #17
    Web Wheeler
    Join Date
    14 Dec 2008
    Location
    Cold Springs
    Posts
    1,505
    Real Name
    Dave
    for me its a no. they are trying to force us to buy a product that isn't viable on its own so they try and regulate us into buying it. no thanks.

    if it was such a great thing then NVE would have got into the business on its own

  28. #18
    Wheeler
    Join Date
    23 Feb 2013
    Location
    Whites Creek
    Age
    50
    Posts
    290
    Real Name
    Tom
    All this question 3 does is force the Nevada government to write a law. The wording is vague in the ballot measure and who knows what would be in the final bill but depending on who is in power they can force what you end up buying by putting high regulations on power generators they don't like and subsidies for those they want to push on the final consumer. This effectively puts the government in control of the power company which is much worse then a well regulated monopoly.

  29. The Following User Likes Thedirtman's Post:

    grumpyoldretiredcop (1 Week Ago)

  30. #19
    Wheeler
    Join Date
    27 Jun 2005
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Age
    40
    Posts
    104
    Real Name
    Matt
    Quote Originally Posted by LEKCAH38 View Post
    https://www.eia.gov/electricity/mont...p?t=epmt_5_6_a

    Kansas’ actually dropped .02 per kW/h (not $2) over the last year, so not ALL states rates go up over time.

    While I completely agree with most of what you said, I’d like to know where you got your breakdown info from. The link above will show info all the way back to “issues prior to 2011,” and there are discrepancies with between the gov reports and the info you’ve shared.
    It looks like Kansas actually had an increase over the time frame I was referencing (1997-2017, sorry I don't think I declared a date range originally). There are many sources of electrical rates if you Google it. I found this format easy to chew through:
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...pPxM7V9xgKl150

    All these CA comparisons are a bit narrow sighted. Why not compare to other deregulated states? There are 15 others! I get it, you don't like CA, but that doesn't mean we'll turn into CA overnight by having some things in common. The better way to compare results is against the average. CA had the second highest increase over years 1997-2017, so you are using the worst case scenario as your only comparison. The worst case absolutely must be included and considered, but using it as your only frame of reference is not good science or sound statistical analysis. CA also had some HUGE issues with PG&E going bankrupt and the energy shortage that affected electrical rates, but were not necessarily due to the deregulation.

    Nevada always seems to write things into law, it's how the state operates for some reason. I run across this all the time in my line of work (analytical chemistry) because the state has actually written old analytical methods into the law that must be used long after other improved methods have taken their place. The Feds and other states have moved on to better technology and we're stuck using decades-old methodologies because it literally takes an act of the Nevada legislature to write a new law. I agree it is not the best way to do things, but it doesn't necessarily mean the state government is controlling everything, it just takes longer for things to change and it's a bit more hassle for those following the requirements, but it's not a total loss of control.

  31. #20
    Web Wheeler
    Join Date
    25 Jan 2010
    Location
    Elko
    Posts
    2,746
    Real Name
    Max
    CA fucked up Gas Cans. They’re definitely not the example to look to.

  32. The Following 5 Users Like maxamillion2345's Post:

    69cj5 (1 Week Ago), CashMoney (1 Week Ago), DJRENO (6 Days Ago), grumpyoldretiredcop (1 Week Ago), McNasty (1 Week Ago)

  33. #21
    I support Reno4x4!
    Join Date
    21 Aug 2008
    Location
    Sparks, NV
    Posts
    3,792
    Real Name
    John
    Im normally a strict libertarian on political issues, and I would like to see competition in the market. But going from full regulation to no regulation overnight using an amendment to the Nevada constitution gives me severe pause. Big casinos in Vegas are pushing for this bill, namely so they can generate/purchase their own power and leave us to fend for ourselves.

    Id be thrilled to see a competitive market permitted in Nevada, but I want to see it rolled out in a controlled manner versus a smash change beyond our control.
    Only wheeled Kia Sorento in Nevada on 31's.

  34. #22
    Web Wheeler
    Join Date
    05 Nov 2006
    Location
    Reno
    Age
    41
    Posts
    1,214
    Real Name
    Ben
    Quote Originally Posted by FeCamel View Post
    I am not for Question 3, but there is a lot of bad information here.

    The infrastructure is a moot point. The PUC and FERC will still regulate the transmission rates, as they always have. NV Energy can't just charge whatever they want to stick it to you. NV Energy has never had to be a very forward thinking or dynamic company because they are a monopoly, and we pay the price for that in many areas.

    It is not a fair point to say that rates went up in deregulated states across the board because ALL rates went up over time, even in regulated states. Saying otherwise is an intentionally misleading lie or sheer ignorance. Here is the breakdown:

    States whose costs rose at LESS than the national average post deregulation (saved money): Maine, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Texas
    States whose cost rose at the same rate as the national average (within 0.1 cents per kWH) (no change post deregulation): New York, Montana
    States whose costs rose MORE than the national average post deregulation (lost money): Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Delaware, Maryland, Michigan, California

    So of the 16 states who deregulated, 6 saw cheaper prices, 2 didn't change, and 8 saw increased prices when compared to the national average. The Governor's energy committee report indicated that NV would save about $1.1 billion per year with deregulation. I'm not encouraging a vote one way or another, but please have the proper information in front of you before making your decision.
    I don't understand why you think the puc will still be around. I could be wrong, but I've never seen anything that says we will keep the puc. As for ferc, they don't regulate the price of your power bill. They only care about the structure and reliability of the grid. They would never get involved if your bill doubled. As for comparison to California, I think we definitely have to compare this to California because we are right next to them. If we lived in Maine, I could see not worrying about what California prices are, but the fact is that we border them and the same things can happen here. I've noticed that some people who I have talked to about this issue, keep saying we "could" get a cent or two in savings, but never think about the worst case scenario. My parents live here and are on fixed incomes, I would hate to see their bill double. I hope my daughter lives her whole life here in northern Nevada and I don't want to screw this place up for her future. I'm am voting no on 3.

  35. #23
    Wheeler
    Join Date
    27 Jun 2005
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Age
    40
    Posts
    104
    Real Name
    Matt
    Quote Originally Posted by slopoke View Post
    I don't understand why you think the puc will still be around. I could be wrong, but I've never seen anything that says we will keep the puc. As for ferc, they don't regulate the price of your power bill. They only care about the structure and reliability of the grid. They would never get involved if your bill doubled. As for comparison to California, I think we definitely have to compare this to California because we are right next to them. If we lived in Maine, I could see not worrying about what California prices are, but the fact is that we border them and the same things can happen here. I've noticed that some people who I have talked to about this issue, keep saying we "could" get a cent or two in savings, but never think about the worst case scenario. My parents live here and are on fixed incomes, I would hate to see their bill double. I hope my daughter lives her whole life here in northern Nevada and I don't want to screw this place up for her future. I'm am voting no on 3.
    First of all, the FERC regulates the rates of bulk transmission of electricity. They control the rates so NV Energy could not wantonly raise the bulk transmission prices for using their infrastructure. This is a concern several people have listed, so I addressed it:
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...0y4xFS7jTHf9a5

    Secondly, why would the PUC go anywhere? While it would have diminished responsibilities, the power to regulate transmission rates is still squarely in their court. Please point out in Question 3 where the PUC is eliminated. All of the articles I've read specifically speak about the PUC still existing. That is also how all of the deregulated states operate when I was researching the issue. There is a ton of misunderstanding about this topic. Really, the only change is that consumers will be able to choose their provider. That's it. The infrastructure remains the same. Transmission rates remain the same. NV Energy doesn't get to double dip. NV Energy doesn't get to tack on any extra fees or costs for using "their" infrastructure. Furthermore, the gas market in NV is still regulated, do you think the PUC is going to pack up and ignore all of their other responsibilities because the consumers will pick their electrical providers instead of the PUC? So we won't have any more water or sewage because the PUC is going away? No more telephone service in NV? Of course the PUC is not going anywhere!

    I am also voting no because I think our rates are currently pretty good and I don't think the unknown of going unregulated is worth the risk of POSSIBLE increases. But holy hell, it seems everyone is buying into propaganda and not doing ANY research. What happens if things start to change and the monopoly stops working in our favor?

    I understand we must CONSIDER what happened in CA, but it is not responsible to use it as the ONLY point of reference. Why not look at Oregon? It is also right next door, and their rates are LOWER than Nevada's. Oregon is technically deregulated but they called it something else so it is not always listed as a deregulated state (https://quickelectricity.com/average...-deregulation/). Montana is pretty close to us and deregulated and their rates are also lower than Nevada's. It seems the "No on 3" crowd continually cherry picks data and the confirmation bias is off the charts. Even though I agree with the no vote, the reasoning is extremely alarming.
    Last edited by FeCamel; 1 Week Ago at 08:22 AM. Reason: more info

  36. The Following 2 Users Like FeCamel's Post:

    ManNamedJed (1 Week Ago), maxamillion2345 (6 Days Ago)

Similar Threads

  1. Event 2018 KTMB Community Cleanup - May 5, 2018
    By unreng in forum Events & Trail Runs
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 11th, 2018, 08:51 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 5th, 2018, 09:15 AM
  3. Ballot
    By MrBfy in forum Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: April 12th, 2016, 04:55 PM
  4. NV Energy question
    By cmarjeep in forum Chit-Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 12th, 2015, 08:42 AM
  5. By By NV Energy
    By DaGimp in forum Chit-Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 1st, 2013, 07:45 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •