Texas Electric Retail Market Is Working
Competition and retail choice are working in
the Texas electric market.
Instead of celebrating this success, critics are blaming retail
electric providers for problems caused by the increasingly
dysfunctional, legislatively-mandated Price-to-Beat.
The Price-to-Beat was originally the regulatory price at which
existing (default) providers had to sell their electricity.
Meanwhile, it was hoped that new providers could earn a profit
selling electricity at a lower price.
By the time 2006 rolled around, it was clear there was no longer any
need for the Price-to-Beat. Competition, not regulations, now keeps
prices low. Texas electric consumers are able to choose from up to
41 different plans offered by as many 18 providers, with over 60
percent of residential customers having exercised identifiable
choice.
Fortunately, the Price-to-Beat is set to expire on Jan. 1, 2007. But
it isn’t going down without a fight.
For instance, the Price-to-Beat is serving as a psychological price
floor, more than likely keeping prices higher than they would be
otherwise.
Additionally, since changes in the Price-to-Beat are limited to two
per year, it has distorted market prices and added uncertainty in
the marketplace at a time when natural gas prices have been changing
rapidly.
While natural gas prices rose by an average of 49 percent between
April and November, 2005, political factors led to no increase in
the Price-to-Beat during this time. So default providers were not
able to recover their increased costs. In other words, for eight
months many consumers avoided paying the costs incurred by the
increase in natural gas prices.
However, if a default Texas electric provider had pockets deep
enough to ride this out, it could actually use the Price-to-Beat to
gain a competitive advantage over a new, smaller provider which must
raise its prices to cover costs—or go out of businesses.
So not only is the Price-to-Beat poorly designed for today’s market,
the political intervention in the market it accommodates further
harms competition and consumers.
Despite these problems, the market is already beginning to look past
the Price-to-Beat as industry participants anticipate its demise.
Default providers are preparing for an increase of competition
against each other as well as against the new providers which have
sprung up under the Price-to-Beat. A number of new rate plans have
been announced designed to attract and retain customers after
termination.
Some new plans facilitate risksharing, like one that closely tracks
the market price of gas. Others offer greater certainty if customers
pay for it, such as a plan that offers price protection from changes
in the cost of natural gas.
Many critics, however, can’t see past the Price-to-Beat. Despite the
discounts and new offerings, the main question being asked of
default providers is why they haven’t lowered their
Price-to-Beat—with the threat of stronger price controls looming if
they don’t do so soon.
Markets are always competitive except when the government interferes
with them. Imposing price controls is guaranteed to harm the
burgeoning competition in the electric market and dash the
expectations of all market participants—retailers, producers,
investors and consumers.
Texas is about to become the first state in the country to operate
an electric market where the vast majority of prices are
deregulated. We are also the national leader when it comes to
telecom deregulation and tort reform. This is why Texas was recently
rated the second best business climate in the nation.
If we want to stay on top, more deregulation—not price controls—is
the only way to go.
Bill Peacock http://www.texaspolicy.com/commentaries_single.php?report_id=1223
Texas Electric
|