61–70 of 267 posts
I had no idea what Griddy was, and after glancing at the website, I assumed it was a failed tech startup. I’ve never seen a utility company with such a modern website and design language before.
Not a fan of this. People buying electricity at wholesale prices is on them.
The fact that ERCOT sets the prices makes this whole situation complicated, I have no clue if anyone actually broke the law here. But certainly setting the price this high was immoral, useless, and just a transfer of money from people buying electricity to the people who were already producing as much electricity as they could at 1/10th the price. The fact that these people participated in the wholesale market assuming that that market operated under the normal norms of western civilization is not particularly their fault, but an entirely reasonable thing for them to have done. The solution to this problem is not to not let people participate in markets, but to make markets actually follow the normal norms of civilization and not engage in unethical price gouging during emergencies.
[1] https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/consumer-protection/dis...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s surprising there isn’t some insurance product to defend against the surprise bills.
I had a friend who worked there and we discussed potential solutions to this after the 2019 spike (I worked at a BNPL fintech and now at an insuretech). It was really a lot for a startup to do and no third parties would take on a program at that scale. Technically this company was trying to fulfill the market need driven by the deregulation, and trying to provide lower cost solutions to the consumer, but they needed…
You mean, like, they could charge a slightly higher price most of the time, so they can shelter their customers from rare wild price fluctuations?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only way other electric companies would be able to eat the difference between retail and wholesale rates would be to overcharge for years, hoard cash, and then pay out that buffer during this crisis. Presumably, this is what they did. Doesn't actually seem better for consumers?
Except during events like this, that people are not and cannot be prepared for. Griddy going out of business is nothing -- if someone else wants to take up the business model, they can tomorrow. Individual people being charged thousands for debts difficult to discharge is the real harm.
For one, I suspect that ERCOT wouldn't allow a new company with this model access to the grid immediately, at least until this blows over a bit.
But regarding "thousands in debts"; I'm curious how that will be handled. It seems that these are debts to Griddy, but Griddy no longer exists, apparently for non-payment, which implies that ERCOT does not expect to be paid. Do these customers now owe this debt to ERCOT directly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only way other electric companies would be able to eat the difference between retail and wholesale rates would be to overcharge for years, hoard cash, and then pay out that buffer during this crisis. Presumably, this is what they did. Doesn't actually seem better for consumers?
Except during events like this, that people are not and cannot be prepared for. Griddy going out of business is nothing -- if someone else wants to take up the business model, they can tomorrow. Individual people being charged thousands for debts difficult to discharge is the real harm.
The other providers can only survive (assuming they do) by having overcharged for years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The problem here as I understand it is that ERCOT stepped in and artificially set an absurdly high wholesale price Incorrect. ERCOT set a price ceiling, not a price. The wholesale price without the ERCOT price ceiling would have been far, far higher than $9000 kwh. That ERCOT is at blame for the price ceiling is absurd . * ERCOT is to blame for a lot of other things though.
Out of curiosity can you point me to where that's stated in plain English by the parties involved (if there is such a place)? I must have bad info/assumptions
> ERCOT has informed the Commission that energy prices across the system are clearing at less than $9,000, which is the current system-wide offer cap pursuant to 16 TAC §25.505(g)(6)(B)... The Commission believes this outcome is inconsistent with the fundamental design of the ERCOT market... the market price for the energy needed to serve that load should... be at its highest.
It’s not exactly plain English, but the Public Utilities Commission is pretty clearly telling ERCOT that they should ignore the current clearing rates and raise prices until there’s enough power or they hit the $9,000 ceiling, whichever comes first.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem here as I understand it is that ERCOT stepped in and artificially set an absurdly high wholesale price, to try to stimulate production. And then Griddy was forced to pass this price straight down to their customers. The narrative about this being a "market failure" seems really wrong. Really seems like it should be on TX to make the customers whole here, given that they ordered Griddy to pass along huge a…
>The problem here as I understand it is that ERCOT stepped in and artificially set an absurdly high wholesale price Incorrect. ERCOT set a price ceiling, not a price. The wholesale price without the ERCOT price ceiling would have been far, far higher than $9000 kwh. That ERCOT is at blame for the price ceiling is absurd . * ERCOT is to blame for a lot of other things though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except during events like this, that people are not and cannot be prepared for. Griddy going out of business is nothing -- if someone else wants to take up the business model, they can tomorrow. Individual people being charged thousands for debts difficult to discharge is the real harm.
That's an interesting point actually. For one, I suspect that ERCOT wouldn't allow a new company with this model access to the grid immediately, at least until this blows over a bit. But regarding "thousands in debts"; I'm curious how that will be handled. It seems that these are debts to Griddy, but Griddy no longer exists, apparently for non-payment, which implies that ERCOT does not expect to be paid. Do these cus…
Griddy is shutting down. They exist for the moment, the debt they are owed is an asset, and even if they are dissolved their assets will be sold off to pay their creditors, so someone will be owed the money.
I wonder why there wasn't some sort of stop-loss pricing (disconnect service if price exceeds X) built into the user agreement. That would have prevented all the negative publicity. Griddy was a great idea, but it wasn't for everyone. Especially those who don't have backup solar or generators.