Texas power plants have no responsibility to provide electricity in emergencies, judges rule
Texas power plants have no responsibility to provide electricity in emergencies, judges rule
A panel of judges has said that big power companies cannot be held liable for failure to provide electricity during the 2021 blackout. The reason is Texas’ deregulated energy market.
Almost three years since the deadly Texas blackout of 2021, a panel of judges from the First Court of Appeals in Houston has ruled that big power companies cannot be held liable for failure to provide electricity during the crisis. The reason is Texas’ deregulated energy market.
The decision seems likely to protect the companies from lawsuits filed against them after the blackout. It leaves the families of those who died unsure where next to seek justice.
In February of 2021, a massive cold front descended on Texas, bringing days of ice and snow. The weather increased energy demand and reduced supply by freezing up power generators and the state’s natural gas supply chain. This led to a blackout that left millions of Texans without energy for nearly a week.
The state has said almost 250 people died because of the winter storm and blackout, but some analysts call that a serious undercount.
It is almost like natural monopolies, such as primary power generation and supply, should be under the control of the Government and not private individuals.
They all used to be. Then Reagan and Clinton happened.
Yep. Essential services should not be for profit.
For profit isn’t inherently a bad thing, but the more essential the service should warrant more and more regulations on safety security and pricing. They should not be given unlimited control over these.
Government agencies are more than capable of providing equally shitty service even without a profit motive, see: DMV. Any monopoly is. This is partially why regarding universal healthcare most people aren’t advocating for government owned healthcare facilities, but the government being the single payer to privately run facilities to control prices.
That’s communism and we are a capitalist country.
The right thing to do under a capitalist economy is to buy the government and give yourself a monopoly.
This isn’t a natural monopoly, it’s protected by legislature and cronyism.
A proper capitalist approach to utilities, then the pipes and wires need to be considered no different then the road they are installed on. Recoup money by selling metered wholesale access to the carriers and utilities.
But we don’t have proper capitalism. We have this bastardized American version that sucks.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
We settled it before the damn constitution even started. How these nitwits in DC don’t see how publicly run infrastructure doesn’t provide for the common defense or promote general welfare is beyond me. But I guess running water, heat, affordable healthcare, and an ability to communicate with each other and the rest of the world doesn’t count under that, somehow.
Maybe if the courts took the founders intent from the Prologue instead of the secret letters to their mistresses, we’d have a functional system. But that’s just my opinion.
No no... Checks the GOP playbook: we just need to offer a premium power support plan so if the power goes out they'll provide you a backup generator. It just costs twice the normal rate.
I know your joking here, but this is actually the path forward and is being implemented in other states and countries.
The power company provides at a discount or for free a home backup battery to the residence. If not free, You pay off the battery at a very affordable rate but end up with a smaller power bill as the power company can access its power to balance the load, filling it up when power is cheap and the battery being used when power is expensive.
In a blackout, the home owner gets to use the battery and doesn't suffer an outage.
It makes the grid more secure by dispersing it around thousands of homes instead of a large expensive failure points and gives them an improved ability to balance the overall load instead of needing a gas peaker plant.
I think it was recently announced that a Vermont power company was going to onboard 100% of their users in the next few years, but it's happening elsewhere too. If a tree takes something down in a snow storm, people won't lose power giving them time to fix it.
The issue here is specifically that they're not monopolies any more, because of deregulation
Ironically, if they were a monopoly, they would have an obligation to provide power in emergencies, per the ruling.
Why did it take me so long to finally realize that by privatizing services like these, governments are preemptively shifting the blame when the service fails? Voters who are angry at the energy company won't be (as) angry with the politicians.
What are yah, some sorta communist? /s He's sayin private companies shouldnt be fuckin us over, get him! /s
Production can be liberalised, but it requires good regulation. Regulation failed to include a rule for responsibility to provided a minimum of energy, the judge can't do more than the regulation law. It works in EU, we didn't have blackout past year even though the situation was dramatic mostly due to the Russian invasion, because the liberalised market allowed efficient sharing of energy where it was most needed.
I wouldn't be so certain a public monopoly could have managed it in such an efficient way (in terms of finance, energy usage and service). People tend to idealize public administration.
Texans must love the abuse, they keep voting for it.
Worth noting this ruling is explicitly based on statewide legislation, meaning this could be changed at any time, if the legislature cared at all.
You really do get exactly what you vote for.
There's also a lot of voter suppression and gerrymandering.
It’s not that they love it. They’re just so dumb they’ll be convinced it was the fault of the gays and/or trans people.
I just moved out of that state.
Never blamed anyone for leaving but use to advocate a lot to push for change in red states like mine but at this point its obvious they are trying to make living in those states untenable for those with a conscious or not completely crushed & apathetic.
Three cheers for privatization of public utilities! /s
As an aside, I am gutted by 250+ people losing their lives because Texan politicians can't get their act together to hold companies responsible. Legislation works ... and politicians can, and should, make the laws.
This was the second time it happened too. It happened ten years prior as I recall. So they did nothing then. Did nothing later. No responsibility for anything later. Fuck Texas.
They do have their act together. It just doesn't include doing anything good for Texans.
Remember when conservatives blamed "windmills" for this? All while conservatives in charge of Texas raked in millions of dollars in campaign donations from ERCOT members. Conservatives will gleefully watch your family die for fun or profit.
A conservative is incapable of empathy or remorse. Be very careful in your dealings with them. They do not value the lives of others the way normal people do.
Incapable of truth, too. As a lawyer, I will not take them on as clients. They lie constantly to justify their emotions. That's really it.
But muh feewings!
As an aside, I used to live in a remote fishing area and we had tons of American visitors. I remember one woman told me she knew Obama was the devil because she felt "the evil" emanating from him.
smdh
Hot take: The ruling is accurate.
Vote for candidates who privatize utilities. Get what you vote for.
Only sucks for those that can't leave and are stuck with a system they can't correct.
Capitalism 👌
As one of those people who is stuck in the system I can’t correct: I agree.
I had to shit in grocery bags for a week because my toilet was frozen solid. But the blame only partly lies on the power companies. The vast majority of the blame lies on the regulatory agency who had the opportunity to require winterized gear for power plants… And repeatedly refused to do so.
Companies will always choose the cheapest option for whatever market they’re in. And winterizing all your gear is expensive when compared to… Well… Not. Could they have taken the initiative and winterized anyways? Absolutely. But if there’s one thing humans are generally really really bad at, it’s emergency preparedness. Because nobody wants to spend a ton of money building an earthquake-resistant home until after they experience their first earthquake. But that’s why building codes exist, to ensure everyone is forced to build to a minimum safe standard. To use this same metaphor, the building codes didn’t require winterized gear, so the companies didn’t build winterized gear. The fault primarily lies with the people who wrote the building codes, while knowing full well that the area could and would experience winter weather.
ERCOT is the regulatory agency that set those standards, and ERCOT is the agency that refused to require winterized gear. It wouldn’t be fair to penalize the power companies for failing to provide power, when ERCOT should have ensured their facilities were adequately prepared. It would also set a weird precedent to require companies to provide something in a disaster. Yes, they’re utility companies, and are subject to more regulation than most. But does this also mean they could be penalized for downed power lines during a tornado, or for blown transformers during a hurricane flood in Houston?
Right, but also power delivery shouldn't be privatized at all. Sure the energy providers might not technically be at fault, but having a corporate middle man providing an essential service is ridiculous. We shouldn't be talking about electricity providers as corporate entities at all. But you are still technically correct
That would take away their liberties!
I'm sorry you had to go through that, and even more sorry your vote isn't joined by others in greater numbers.
Absolutely. Protecting profits and shareholders is priority #1.
GOP: "Cry more, peasants."
How can a power company realistically be compelled to provide power, in an emergency? They cannot guarantee that any more than a police officer can guarantee their ability to protect you.
Such a law could only be there to create scapegoats for politicians to hang after they botch the response to a natural disaster or some minor event that significantly disrupts power distribution.
SLOs and SLAs are a thing. And yes, they do and can guarantee power to enterprises that pay for it. So it’s not a matter of “if” but, like all things Texans, “how much”.
IMO it should be less about compelling them during an emergency as ensuring adequate disaster preparation and grid stability well before an emergency. Not much to do once the damage is already done other than figure out how to ensure it won’t happen again.
Friendly reminder about the event in question: the temperature wasn’t even THAT cold (minimum 0F IIRC). Much of the world deals with ice storms and freezing temperatures without the entire grid failing. I understand a state that deals with heat more than cold being less prepared for ice, but the lesson should need to be learned only once.
This is the same for other jurisdictions as well, it's just that emergency situations will be investigated. The northeast blackout is another use case in North America and it happened in August so things were much different. We've had ice storms that took out transmission infrastructure too. Ultimately the regulator in Texas case actually reported on these risks and recommended changes to regulations.
Cops don't have to serve and protect or abide by the law. Power companies don't have to supply power. People who sell you things can deny you access to them.
Hey this is fun, let's do more!
Health Insurance companies don't have to provide payment for health services you pay them to cover.
Corporations are people, my friend. Just people with all the rights and no responsibilities.
And no taxes or very little.
Corporate taxes are a regressive tax on the poor. There's no benefit to taxing a business instead of people directly, and serious harm caused.
Taxing Amazon doesn't hurt Jeff Bezos. It just makes products more expensive for people that already struggle to afford them. It doesn't even effect Amazon's profit margin.
The whole social contract thing in the USA is giving off an EULA vibe these days.
Reminds me of Kimberly Latrice Jones' chat.
that is the greatest compliment thank you
Better pull up those bootstraps and start finding your own individual source of power. Maybe you can drill for oil in your backyard?
But don't do this by installing solar panels. That's "woke!"
Then once you strike oil find out you never owned the mineral rights to begin with ¯\(ツ)/¯
Don't stop paying big power. Just ready yourself to die quietly when you're supposed to.
The more and more I hear about these terrible decisions made in Texas, no exception abortion (even if medically deemed necessary) and now this, the more and more I am grateful I don't live in that trainwreck state.
A recent study showed that Texans have the least personal freedom of any state
Oh the irony
I hate this fucking state so much.
Deregulating the electricity industry has been a complete and utter disaster.
#fuckyourdividends
First world, third world, and Texas.
Texas is a shithole, and even more insufferable are the Texan nationalists. It's funny from a distance, but being there not so much.
Phew. Worried this could lead to overturning that cops have no duty to protect you.
If you don’t like the service you’re getting then just vote in new leaders who can change things /s
Thankfully nobody in their right mind chooses to live in this state, those that remain were born with a death wish, or since sort of moral ambiguity to life.
Supreme Court: How expensive could it possibly be to sue a utility for breach of contract? $10?
Or they just can't leave for one reason or another -- moving is tough
The free market solution would allow communities to negotiate contracts that DID hold the provider liable and allow competitors to emerge that would focus on different aspects like reliability, renewable production or integration with other grids.
If you aren't aware of the story of Central and Southwest Corporation (a Texas power company) and thr "midnight connection", it's the type of story that I'm sure is nearing the top of Netflix's documentary todo list.
On May 4, 1976, a power company based in Texas sent electricity from a substation in Vernon, Texas, to Altus, Okla. By doing so, they were breaking a deal among power companies in Texas to keep electricity within state borders.
If what Texas has with ERCOT is neither free market nor a public utility, what is it?
If what Texas has with ERCOT is neither free market nor a public utility, what is it?
A profit generating machine.
Free market when Republicans say it can be free- like free to pollute.
I presume your post is just informational with a rhetorical question at the end to get people to think.
But if you have any doubts as to why "free market" solutions don't ever work even remotely as well as theoretical models would suggest in the US, there's a simple answer that always appends itself before any other legitimate challenges can be honestly addressed.
There are no truly "free market" solutions in the US.
There is no reason for the rulers to allow the politicians to legistate the ability for anyone to threaten their supremacy without Byzantine, unjust, and decidedly non-equitable loops powered by the Establishment powers that the wealthy have captured.
In the opinion, Justice Adams noted that, when designing the Texas energy market, state lawmakers “could have codified the retail customers’ asserted duty of continuous electricity on the part of wholesale power generators into law.”
Wow, so helpful to say that 20 years after the fact
I agree with the problem, but I also kind of agree with the judge. The point of separation of powers is that the judicial system interprets the will of the legislative. We have had similar cases in Finland , where the law clearly should say one thing and the courts conclude that the law in fact says another thing. Fortunately, this situation occasionally leads the parliament into saying 'well fuck' and changing the law.
I will admit I don't really understand the role of courts making law in the US and other common law countries, so it might be different there.
It's a tough spot because most people, and maybe legislators themselves, didn't think they had to write down "power companies must provide power to the best of their ability" and whatever other legalese that would force companies to do something about winterization. It feels like there should be an implicit "hey, if you're aware of an issue that might kill people and destroy homes, maybe try to fix it." The new laws around winterization are little comfort to those who have already lost loved ones to an avoidable problem. Of course, then you have litigious idiots who will sue because the tractor company didn't say you shouldn't try to play jumprope with the harvester blades. I don't know what the solution is there, it seems we can only really be reactive.
Well, I guess the saying "regulations are written in blood" didn't come from nowhere.
The one time I remember something like that happening in the US was the 2003 Do Not Call telemarketing act. There was a court case that concluded that Congress had not properly authorized regulators to enforce the Do Not Call registry. Congress then took a day or two to pass a new law authorizing the thing they forgot to the first time.
This comes down to two things:
- Americans really, really hate taking telemarketing calls, regardless of party affiliation
- The telemarketing industry didn't have significant lobbying at the time to tell anyone in Congress to argue against it
So bizarre, you'd think there would be some implicit realities of what is constituted by contracting for grid load power generation & even peaker plants. The grid has to be maintained to function and can't lose frequency even if that does mean shedding there should be key named emergency services that should be maintained that would warrant liability on power generators. This is all upside with little cost or risk & also why there was no effort to coordinate because nobody is responsible.
As I understood it, critical circuits like hospitals were being prioritized and being kept (mostly?) online.
But house heating is generally not on a different circuit. They would normally rotate the houses which are blacked out so they would at least have power some of the time but this one was so bad all the power went into the priority circuits (like hospitals).
Let me guess, if I don't like it I'm free to start my own power generation company, in a city that's had only one provider for over 60 years.
Oh no that's California. In Texas there's 500 providers and no service.
Rich people's electricity stayed on, I'm just saying...
People seem surprised that the face-eating leopards who said that everything was going to be fine if you just allow deregulation of the market, proceeded to then eat the faces of the poors (but not those of the rich, at least whenever it could be avoided).
I'm not even kidding - see no /s - but in Texas, this isn't a bug, it's a feature. This is what "lower taxes" means, bc you don't get something for nothing; and when you pay less, you necessarily get less in return (even though the converse is not always true) - in this case lower robustness to perturbations of the system.
Texas does not have lower Taxes. That is a myth. Texas has lower Income Taxes. They more than make up for it in the other taxes and fees they collect. Texas is actively trying to force People from their homes such that wealthy connected folks can buy the property and rent it out.
Texas does not have lower taxes for the poors, but nonetheless it has lower taxes for the most wealthy citizens. Rich people literally cannot buy as much as the difference between what they make vs. the poors, so the lower Income vs. Sales taxes works in their favor, plus whatever other contributions they may make (charity, tips) they get to choose to hold back in return for services rendered - a building (or wing/floor of one) named in their honor, etc.
But since facts rarely matter, "lower taxes" is one major reason why people want to live in Texas, and why bills passed in Texas get passed - e.g. I was presuming that was how the disconnection from the federal energy grid was sold to the populace.
Even (especially) if it's not strictly true, "lower taxes" is the reason for much that is done in Texas.
This is not even a taxes issue - it’s extremely short sighted regulation, or lack of. But, no sarcasm intended, if regulators don’t set any bar for reliability, I suppose it follows that companies aren’t liable for it.
"Short sighted" presumes that those who enacted it did not realize what effects it would have, but very likely they did, and this outcome is how they wanted things to go.
(1) Companies are free to make moar monay; and (2) the "only people who (should) matter" get electricity, when resources become scarce, whereas minorities do not. Bonus points if infants from the latter group die, thus keeping that population more "manageable", in that "Pro-Life" state that is so against abortion that it would sooner allow the mother to die than to ensure that she receives lifesaving medical care, e.g. in cases of miscarriage or such where for anyone who knows anything at all about biology (or is willing to read through the definition of the word "miscarriage") there is not even the remotest shadow of a doubt that there is no "child's life" involved at all (anymore).
But it is complex a little bc those who write the laws are not those who vote on them. Even more foundationally though... well, this video explains it far better than I could: https://youtu.be/agzNANfNlTs?si=EX7LDD58Q5AOhHrY (if you need an intro to decide whether to watch the whole thing or not, use from 3 or 4 to 5:30 min from beginning)
Texas power plants have no responsibility to
provide electricitysave lives in emergencies, judges rule <- FTFYAfter all, why should they care if you suffer or die? There's plenty more where you came from.
Man, Texas is a real shithole
What a shithole. And I say that as an Indiana resident. At least our heat stays on in the winter.
Yeah these shithole states are really poisoning the blood of America. Did I get that right? /s
All the states offshore the blood poisoning to China.
Is there legislation that says otherwise? What should the judges do here?
AFAIK it wouldn't be legislation, it would be damages paid for some kind of breach of contract or some other contract-related issue, since the city delegated energy management to private companies. I'm sure there may be some contractual relationship with the city as well as the customers, but it's not clear to me what type of contractual basis for damages this would amount to.
I suppose it could be gross negligence for not taking reasonable measures to prevent that kind of catastrophic failure, but honestly the standard of care would seem hard to establish. Still, a week without power seems excessive even by extreme weather standards.
Not saying this ruling doesn't suck, just that it seems legally kind of ambiguous.
You have the right to food, clothing and shelter, and eventually they’ll rule those aren’t required either.
You must not be from the US…
I’m from and live in Texas, trust me, I realize how bad it is 😑
Second only to the lack of responsibility that Texan judges have.
It amazes me that Texas gets away with this. One would think that being part of the federation of states means what you do immediately puts you under federal oversight, regardless if it crosses state lines or not.
They went to very special efforts to remove themselves from the national energy grid, the only one of the Continental states that did so iirc. Which didn't stop them from halfheartedly asking for aid when shit hit the fan. They literally asked for this "right", to self regulate independently from the federal government.
Their own self stupidity should not stop them from being regulated by the federal government. It's like if Florida allowed murder as long as it was Florida citizens within Florida's borders.
Texas would secede from the union if it could. Everything’s bigger in Texas, including their stupidity/ignorance/selfishness.
Seems Texas and Alberta, Canada have a lot in common.
Yikes. You'd think in a place where they know they will have extraordinary weather events, they would legislate special requirements to ensure everyone's safety.
Incidentally, I first heard about this saga when I saw a report a while ago about people being scammed by solar panel grifters (who overcharge for installing systems that provide little to no independence from the grid despite making those claims in their ads).
It's a good opportunity to remind people: solar panels without a grid disconnect and/or a battery are not independent of the grid. The utility company will shut them off while the power is out.
What a shit hole state.