by donshan » Wed 21 Dec 2005, 13:08:41
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nth', '[')Calpine's business model went bellyup because they have too much debt and they couldn't sell all the power the plants generate.
This is the fundelmental problem of having an open market for electricity. Powerplants cost a lot of they are not producing power 24hrs. The economics don't justify building a powerplant to be operating a few weeks of the year during peak power and only during the day. The electricity market has large peaks. Just in California- demand swings from 20mw to 45+mw. This large swing in demand does not warrant investors to invest in power to deliver the last few mw of power demand. That is the problem with a free market.
Thanks for the added info. The question still becomes why couldn't Calpine sell most of their power, unless it was the price they needed to be profitable was too high because of high natural gas prices. Just to understand my point, if gas was so cheap that Calpine could burn gas and make power cheaper than hydropower the utilities were buying, then the plants would become base load plants running at 100% capacity and hydro would be surplus investment.
I suppose the only difference of opinion I have is, that even a fully regulated utility has the same problem of idle peak capacity and many use gas fired peaking turbines. Some spare capacity has to be built, typically with debt, even if it is only used for 2 weeks of peak power, regardless of who owns this peak capacity. Otherwise there are blackouts on hot days. The regulated utility is allowed to include these costs in rates. How is Calpine different? If the contract only called for power two weeks a year, the contract should have covered the fixed costs of unused capacity.
Calpine's business model is defective in that it did not anticipate the effect of high gas prices on demand for their power IMHO.
An expert is someone who has made every mistake possible in their field and learned how to prevent them.