CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS.   Term Paper ID:30281 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Discusses causes of the 2001 crisis.... More...

3 Pages / 675 Words 8 sources, 4 Citations, APA Format $12.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Discusses causes of the 2001 crisis. Contends that demand greater than supply was not the primary cause. Discusses several factors contributing to the mismatch between electricity supply and demand in California. These include large increase in population, increased use of computers, deregulation, market abuses and lack of State planning. Paper Introduction: ETIOLOGY OF THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS: CAUSES The mismatch between electricity supply and demand in California in 2001, wherein demand is outstripping the supply, is not the cause of the state’s energy crisis. Rather, this mismatch is the energy crisis confronting California. The causes of the energy crisis, on the other hand, are those factors that contributed to the development of the mismatch between electricity supply and demand that became painfully apparent early in 2001. Several factors contributed (and continue to contribute) to the mismatch between electricity supply and demand in California. A problem exists, however, with respect to defining one of these factors as the primary cause and relegating others to the status of secondary causes. As an example, one can cite the 13. Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. Several factors contributed (and continue to contribute) to themismatch between electricity supply and demand in California. New plants may ease, but not end,California's crisis. A., & Bergman, L. The market flaw that Californiaoverlooked. In actual fact, the energy crisis in California in 2 1 (a situationin which demand outstrips supply) is a manifestation of the interplay amonga number of factors (Krugman, 2 1a). The eight factors indicated in the precedingparagraph are the secondary causes of California's energy crisis. Krugman, P. This planning grossly underestimated the rate of demandincrease for the last-half of the 199 s and the early years of the currentcentury. (2 1, January 22). A., Jr. United States Census Bureau, United States Department of Commerce.(2 1). The answer is none of the above factors. Which of the above factors is the primary cause of the energy crisisin California in 2 1? etiology of the california energy crisis: causes The mismatch between electricity supply and demand in California in2 1, wherein demand is outstripping the supply, is not the cause of thestate's energy crisis. A problemexists, however, with respect to defining one of these factors as theprimary cause and relegating others to the status of secondary causes. Asan example, one can cite the 13.8 percent population growth in Californiafrom 199 to 2 as a source of vastly increased demand for electricitythat, in turn, contributed to the state's energy crisis in 2 1. The price of power. The New YorkTimes, B2. Population change and distribution: Census brief. These factors include the followingevents, actions, and phenomena: > A very large increase in the state's resident population; > The rapid an enormous increase in the use of computing devices in residences and businesses in California; > The expansion in the number of "server farms" in California that provide service for Internet users throughout the United States and, to a lesser extent, the world; > A failure to increase electricity generating capacity at levels commensurate with the increase in demand for electrical power; > The deregulation of electricity generation and distribution in the state within a policy structure that exacerbated supply and demand issues; > Actions by the two largest electricity distribution companies in the state - PG&E and Southern California Edison - that also exacerbated supply and demand issues; > Environmental laws in California that slowed or deterred the development of new electricity generation capacity in the state; and > Market abuses - withholding electricity generating capacity at crucial times to influence pricing - by private sector providers located outside of California. Yardley, J. The New York Times, B1. (2 1, January 2). The New York Times, A1. Verhovek, S. (2 1, March 26). Trying tofollow the money in California's energy mess. The New York Times,C2. (2 1b, January 7). The New York Times, A1, A 8. Stoft, S. (2 1, January 1 ). References Holson, L. The New York Times, C1. R., & Oppel, R. Oppel, R. (2 1a, January 7). Washington, DC:United States Government Printing Office. The New York Times, C1. Theprimary cause of the energy crisis in California in 2 1 is the abysmalplanning by the state utility commission and the state legislature informulating the policies for the deregulation of the electricity market inthe state. The causes of the energy crisis, on the otherhand, are those factors that contributed to the development of the mismatchbetween electricity supply and demand that became painfully apparent earlyin 2 1. Similar contrasts involvingderegulation and other factors also tend to confuse the issue when oneattempts to declare one factor more so than any other is the primary causeof the energy crisis in California in 2 1. Krugman, P. Texas learns in California how not toderegulate. Incontrast, however, Texas experienced a 22.9 percent increase in populationfrom 199 and 2 , and that state has no energy crisis in 2 1 (UnitedStates Census Bureau, 2 1; Yardley, 2 1). (Krugman, 2 1a; Holson & Oppel, 2 1; Verhovek, 2 1; Oppel & Bergman, 2 1; Stoft, 2 1). H. (2 1, January 12). Rather, this mismatch is the energy crisisconfronting California. Power woes raisequestions over control of gas pipelines. Abuses of power. As a consequence of this planning failure, the planners failed toprovide for the necessary increase in generating capacity to prevent theoccurrence of an energy crisis involving electricity in the state (Krugman,2 1a; Krugman, 2 1b). If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.