1004
submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Almost three years since the deadly Texas blackout of 2021, a panel of judges from the First Court of Appeals in Houston has ruled that big power companies cannot be held liable for failure to provide electricity during the crisis. The reason is Texas’ deregulated energy market.

The decision seems likely to protect the companies from lawsuits filed against them after the blackout. It leaves the families of those who died unsure where next to seek justice.

In February of 2021, a massive cold front descended on Texas, bringing days of ice and snow. The weather increased energy demand and reduced supply by freezing up power generators and the state’s natural gas supply chain. This led to a blackout that left millions of Texans without energy for nearly a week.

The state has said almost 250 people died because of the winter storm and blackout, but some analysts call that a serious undercount.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] wizzor@sopuli.xyz 16 points 10 months ago

I agree with the problem, but I also kind of agree with the judge. The point of separation of powers is that the judicial system interprets the will of the legislative. We have had similar cases in Finland , where the law clearly should say one thing and the courts conclude that the law in fact says another thing. Fortunately, this situation occasionally leads the parliament into saying 'well fuck' and changing the law.

I will admit I don't really understand the role of courts making law in the US and other common law countries, so it might be different there.

[-] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's a tough spot because most people, and maybe legislators themselves, didn't think they had to write down "power companies must provide power to the best of their ability" and whatever other legalese that would force companies to do something about winterization. It feels like there should be an implicit "hey, if you're aware of an issue that might kill people and destroy homes, maybe try to fix it." The new laws around winterization are little comfort to those who have already lost loved ones to an avoidable problem. Of course, then you have litigious idiots who will sue because the tractor company didn't say you shouldn't try to play jumprope with the harvester blades. I don't know what the solution is there, it seems we can only really be reactive.

Well, I guess the saying "regulations are written in blood" didn't come from nowhere.

[-] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Well, they were providing it "to the best of their abilities". With those maxed out prices, they were sure as hell trying to squeez out every kilowatt. Their abilities just sucked due to underinvsetment in reserve capacity. But you can hardly blame them for that. Unlike in most states, they don't get paid for reserve capacity in Texas (and are not required to have any either). Therefore, whichever power company invests in it will have to raise prices, become uncompetitive and go bankrupt. Its not the companies to be blamed, its the politicians/officials who set up Texas electricity market like that. Capitalism can't work if you don't set up and regulate markets to align consumer and public incentives with company incentives.

I recommend practical engineerings video for technical details.

[-] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's not just about reserve capacity, ERCOT was warned about insufficient winterization after the last power grid failure due to cold weather, they just didn't act on it. Should the Texas government have mandated improvements at that time? Absolutely. Do I still believe that ERCOT has at least some blood on their hands because they knew about the problem and chose not to fix it despite the hardship it could cause their customer base? Absolutely.

Also I have seen the practical engineering video, love that guy.

[-] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Unless I am missing something, ERCOT is a distributor. They don't own the power plants and would have hard time forcing power plant owners to make those improvements without government mandate, no? Or does ERCOT already make similar regulations for plants?

[-] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

My understanding is that ERCOT manages the reliability of the entire grid. I won't pretend to understand the exact nature of their purview and powers, but I'll defer to what Abott describes as their role in this incident:

Five days before the winter storm hit Texas, Abbott said ERCOT ensured officials that the power generator was prepared for the cold temperatures, and even issued notices to power plants to ensure they were winterized properly.

And the statement from ERCOT

ERCOT officials have said that some power generators implemented new winter practices after the freeze a decade ago, but they were voluntary.

Admittedly, I don't know the extent of ERCOTs control over the individual companies that manage the generators or infrastructure of the power grid, but it does appear they had enough oversight to claim that the grid could weather another storm, which it could not.

Source: https://www.texastribune.org/2021/02/18/greg-abbott-winter-storm/

[-] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Well, even if they had no power to do anything, saying things have been fixed and are fine should make them liable. How should anyone (legislature, public) work on fixing the issue if they hide it? They should be the ones raising the issue in the first place.

[-] Misconduct@startrek.website 2 points 10 months ago

Nah. Thanks for the info but I'm totally fine with blaming both the government and the shady utility company.

[-] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I mean, if it really is shady then blame away. I am just saying you can't blame a company for not paying out of their own pocket for something the government should have secured.

It would be literally illegal for a corporation to do that. (breach of fedutiary duty, corporations are required by law to make as much profit for investors as they legally can. I am oversimplifying incredibly but it is mostly true)

[-] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The one time I remember something like that happening in the US was the 2003 Do Not Call telemarketing act. There was a court case that concluded that Congress had not properly authorized regulators to enforce the Do Not Call registry. Congress then took a day or two to pass a new law authorizing the thing they forgot to the first time.

This comes down to two things:

  • Americans really, really hate taking telemarketing calls, regardless of party affiliation
  • The telemarketing industry didn't have significant lobbying at the time to tell anyone in Congress to argue against it
this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2023
1004 points (98.8% liked)

News

23305 readers
3703 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS