استراتژی کسب و کار تولید و ارزیابی ریسک در میان تاسیسات برق شهری در کالیفرنیا

MUs must determine their position along a risk spectrum that ranges from actively owning and managing generation assets to adopting a more passive role as a load aggregator that reduces risks and potential financial rewards to the city. The introduction of open markets for electricity in California and many other states in the United States has raised new questions for municipal utilities (MU). What is the role of a MU when there are competitive markets for electricity generation services? Should MUs provide their customers the option to choose an outside generation service provider? What are the risks and rewards faced by a MU in continuing to own generation assets to provide generation services to its customers? This article examines these issues and concludes that, in the absence of captive customers or favorable tax treatment, the risk–reward profile associated with the ownership of generation assets will lie outside the risk tolerance of public entities. As a result, generation business units of most MUs are likely to undergo radical changes, including the sale of generation plants, outsourcing of operational functions, establishment of strategic alliances, and transformation into the role of load aggregators.

While the electric commodity could be packaged with other products and services and marketed to customers, the underlying commodity will remain the same. Hence, the key aspect of holding proprietary positions and operating a commodity business is the ability to successfully manage risks. Sophisticated modeling and information systems become paramount in this endeavor. If investing in these sophisticated systems and personnel becomes uneconomical for small MUs they are likely to outsource many of these functions, even if they continue to own generation assets. Alliance partners to manage generation portfolio and associated risks thus may become more prevalent. While operational functions and short-term risks such as price, weather, volume, and credit risks may be laid off to a large extent, long-term risks associated with the ownership of generation assets will remain with the MU. Upon consideration of the risk of owning generation assets without captive customers, MUs may decide to get out of the generation business and transform themselves into active aggregators, or suppliers of last resort. A small fraction of MUs that believe customers/residents would be adversely affected in the long term by opening their borders may choose to remain closed. This last option will remain viable only if local residents support the idea. Clearly, no single path will suit all MUs. For each utility, the electric portfolio characteristics, attitude toward risk, extent of utility customer satisfaction, and enthusiasm of local residents for direct access will determine the path taken in the coming years.