By Nancy Thomson

THE PROBLEM

As goes California so goes the nation. Unfortunately, this holds true not only for many unwanted trendy social and educational styles but for the recently discovered energy crisis as well. It is a calamity that received warnings from the farsighted years ago. Many politicians however discovered the problem no sooner than the day people were alerted to threats of energy brown or blackouts.

Shades of the Kyoto Treaty, the time is probably past for our casual approach to household or business energy. No longer will we just turn on all our appliances with no thought as to the cost or availability of the juice flowing through the veins of the electrical systems

An article by Gary Benoit asks, Power Crisis or Power Grab? He states that in California "regulation" is called "deregulation." While the California government capped the retail cost of electricity, they allowed the wholesale price to follow the market. As the wholesale prices rose the retail price (by state law) couldn’t be passed on. This imbalance between the regulated prices and unregulated costs forced the utility companies to assume accumulated debt to the brink of bankruptcy.

The 1996 deregulation law also forced the utilities to sell some of their generating plants. Because of this the law, the energy companies had to buy a large part of their electricity from outside sources.

Since capitalism is the name of the game, some producers and marketers in California found loopholes in buying out-of-state. Producers with in-state capacity shipped their power out-of-state and then reimported their product back at a profit.

California’s Governor Gray Davis has a solution not favored by Assemblyman Bill Leonard. He reports that Davis wants California to enter into a "10 year contract with unknown energy suppliers for unknown costs and unknown terms."

The golden state’s problems have escalated into the Pacific Northwest. Industry in this area has greatly increased due to hydropower. While their energy was relatively cheap the influx of industrial plants has caused an increase in price. Northwest aluminum smelters are closing plants and selling their electricity because this makes more money than producing a product.

California was the first state to quasi-deregulate. This is important because on a global basis, California would be the world’s sixth largest economy. Texas is not far behind in industry. This state has most of the natural and domestic oil used in the US. They also have been constructing many power plants, which may result in an excess supply of energy and deescalating prices.

As the power shortage appears now or threatens to arise in the near future, we find that 21 states are enacting restructuring legislation, one state has issued regulatory orders, two states have legislation pending, sixteen states have legislation that is ongoing, and seven states have nothing going at all.

New England restructured in 1966. This Eastern Coast region never had enough power and depended on imports from their neighbors. From September 1999, to December 2000 importing power from Canada and New York saved New England from exceeding its generating capacity. In Massachusetts the utilities are selling at cost to customers while paying suppliers much more. This debt situation is similar to the problems in California. Without importing more of their energy, Massachusetts’s citizens will find their costs rise sharply and blackouts occur.

Just as multinational companies and trade know no borders, so will transference of power cross national boundaries. Interregional wire lines will pass from Canada to New York and New England. American companies are building plants in Mexico to service California and perhaps other southwestern states. Canada is another country where American multinational energy companies are setting up residence. There is even a US proposal to add energy sources to a WTO (World Trade Organization) trade pact.

POWERS BEHIND THE "SCARCITY AGENDA"

What part does government play in the energy shortage? No new power plants have been built in California in a decade and other states are years behind in construction of energy facilities also. The government in collaboration with the environmental movement requires so many permits that it takes at least seven years to build a new energy plant in California if they can be built at all. Environmental restrictions throughout the nation are forcing the same regulation roadblocks. Most people think the Environmentalists are a rather recent grassroots phenomenon. This is not so. A policy guide on environmentalism published in 1977 by the Rockefeller Fund, talks about the transition from abundance to scarcity. What an accurate prediction!

In 1987 the Rockefeller Family founded more than 200 tax-exempt private foundations. Annually foundations award millions to green groups. These elite grantmakers have set up the US national environmental agenda. Federal agencies transform the grant policies into legislation with the help of the non-elected Environmental Protection Agency. Green groups are NGO’s (Non-Governmental Organizations) in the UN. The Rockefeller’s environmental United Nation’s NGO’s policies are channeled into our EPA. Environmental activists in the United States collaborate by pushing the international programs at all levels of society.

One of these organizations, Global Climate Research Program reported to the White House and Al Gore. The former Vice President’s office coordinated nearly a dozen federal agencies concerned with climate control whose goal was to reduce energy consumption.

Propaganda from the internationalists declaring a forth-coming global warming catastrophe gave birth to UN treaties. Clinton’s administration took up the mantra of this unscientific climatic change. Although Clinton signed the 1997 Kyoto Treaty, congress hasn’t ratified it. This Treaty would legally bind the US to reduce its energy consumption by 30 to 40 percent. Escalating fuel costs and lack of power plants in our nation would fall in line with this requirement. Is this an accident?

Other nations in anticipation that Kyoto will become an international reality are preparing. "Industries from petroleum to high finance appear to be positioning themselves to take advantage of whatever climate change policy might come their way."

Countries where energy taxes are in place say this is more damaging than emissions trading. There will be international emissions trading (those who don’t pollute will sell credits to those who do) Funds are being set up by international banks where emission credits would be distributed among investors or sold on the open market.

Suggestions paint a picture of what our future relationship with energy will be like. There will be many different plans for conservation with the incentive to save power, and customers with different levels of supply. One example, those who pay a higher price will get uninterrupted service. Who said environmentalism would SAVE the world? We are headed toward energy interdependence on a global scale.