FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES on 10/20/2000 02:23 
PM ---------------------------


"IssueAlert" <IssueAlert@scientech.com> on 10/19/2000 06:24:37 AM
To: 
cc:  
Subject: Market Manipulation or Fair Earnings in California? Enron, Dynegy 
Report Huge Profits


http://www.consultrci.com

************************************************************************

TrueQuote completes connection to EnronOnline and receives equity investment
from PG&E. Find out more about SCIENTECH'S E-Commerce InfoGrid at:
http://www.consultrci.com
************************************************************************
===============================================================
SCIENTECH IssueAlert, October 19, 2000
Market Manipulation or Fair Earnings in California? Enron, Dynegy Report
Huge Profits
By: Will McNamara, Director, Electric Industry Analysis
===============================================================
As energy companies report third quarter earnings, many active as wholesale
providers are announcing huge profits. For instance, Enron Corp. and Dynegy
have both reported over-the-top earnings for the third quarter, reaping
the benefits of skyrocketing energy prices and a continued focus on asset
expansion. Both companies benefited from high energy prices this summer,
especially in California where electricity prices soared to record levels,
resulting in a doubling and tripling of the generation part of power bills
for San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (SDG&E) customers. At the same time that
these companies are reporting huge earnings, accusations have been leveled
that generators and trading companies "manipulated the production of power
from June through August to create a false shortage and push up prices."

ANALYSIS: First, let me say that I am not picking on Enron and Dynegy.
They just happened to release their Q3 earnings comparatively early, opening
themselves up for evaluation. According to the California Energy Commission,
other non-utility owners or traders of power in California include Calpine,
Destec, Duke, Reliant, Southern, and Williams, who altogether own about
40 percent of the generation in the state (compared to the 15 percent owned
by California's three investor-owned utility companies). As additional
3Q financial statements are released, I would expect any company that is
active on the wholesale market to report a significant increase in earnings,
reflective of the summer price volatility. Even a mid-size utility like
the Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) has posted whopping profits
for Q3, which it attributed directly to the "scalding wholesale electric
market in the Western United States."

With that said, let's take a look at the numbers that we have for the big
players, which are startling. Enron's recurring net income, up 31 percent,
rose to $292 million, or 34 cents a share, compared with 1999 third quarter
earnings of $223 million, or 27 cents a share. By its own admission, sales
in Enron's four business units*wholesale energy operations and services,
retail energy services, transportation and distribution, and broadband
services*grew nearly $30 billion in the third quarter alone. The income
before interest, minority interests and taxes (IBIT) reported by Enron's
wholesale group increased 66 percent in 3Q to $627 million from $378 million
a year ago. The commodity sales and services business increased IBIT to
$404 million in 3Q compared to $172 million last year. CEO Kenneth Lay
says he is "very optimistic about the continued strong growth" of the company.
Over at Dynegy, they are singing the same happy tune. Dynegy reported 
recurring
net income of $176.5 million, or 55 cents a share, compared with Dynegy
/ Illinova pro forma recurring net income of $96.5 million, or 32 cents
per share, for the same period last year. Much of this growth is coming
from Dynegy Marketing and Trade, whose reported net income increased to
$141.9 million*80 percent of the company's consolidated net income.

While neither Enron nor Dynegy has mentioned California in their explanations
of the strong Q3 earnings, clearly the high prices in the state must have
played a large role in the companies' profits. I think most everyone was
expecting any company active in wholesale trading to show strong numbers
in the third quarter, based on the high prices in California alone, but
the extent of the increase is really stunning.

The short answer for the price spikes has been that demand in the state
increased to unanticipated highs, while supply became stretched to meet
the power needs. Going a step further, limited transmission lines, the
fact that no new (significant) power plants have been built in almost two
decades, and a 3-percent increase in demand drove costs up in California
instead of down. Exacerbating the already tight supplies was the fact that
some 2,220 MW of generation, mostly in Southern California, was unavailable
during the summer months due to power plant mechanical failures. Plus,
growing demand in Arizona and lower hydroelectric production in the Pacific
Northwest also contributed to the squeeze in supplies on which California
could rely.

Customers of SDG&E were hit hardest of all as the utility had paid off
its stranded costs, removing a rate freeze and exposing customers to 
market-based
prices. Customers of the other two California IOUs*SCE and PG&E*were protected
because they were still under a rate freeze. However, the utilities themselves
claim to have also suffered from the price spikes as they buy a great deal
of their power on the wholesale market. Due to limited supplies, PG&E and
SCE were forced to pay market prices for power but yet were unable to increase
their customers' rates. For instance, PG&E claims it was paying $0.18/KWh
for energy when by law it could only charge customers $0.055/KWh, leaving
it with an estimated $2.7 billion debt that it is petitioning the CPUC
to bill back to customers.

All of this has been characterized as the "fiasco in California," leaving
many to conclude that the market in the state is not workably competitive.
The only clear winners in the situation were the wholesale providers, who
appeared to simply benefit from the low supply and high demand cycles that
drove California this summer.

The California Power Exchange, the state's power auction through which
all power is traded,  issued a recent report acknowledging that, while
the state's electricity market is severely flawed, it could find "no pattern
of abuse by any group, individual or company participating in the state's
main electricity auction." Rather, the California PX maintains that the
price spikes were caused by the high demand for electricity, a lack of
new generation, higher natural-gas prices, and a drop in out-of-state 
electricity
imports.

Yet, a new report initiated by a group of utilities in the Pacific Northwest,
casts doubt on this and suggests that wholesale providers actually caused
the high energy prices. A Portland-based firm that conducted a private
investigation of the California market asserts that the state had plenty
of electricity generation this summer, and that wholesale providers withheld
power to create artificially high prices. Specifically, the report*written
by economist and utility industry consultant Robert McCollough*says California
in fact had a 32-percent reserve margin, despite the high prices and the
fact that the California ISO issued repeated power emergencies all summer
claiming that the state was in a critical power shortage. In addition,
McCollough claims that demand in California was actually lower than what
was forecast by the Western Systems Coordinating Council. Using EPA data
to suggest that power plants ran below full capacity during peak times
last summer, McCollough accuses generators of voluntarily lowering their
production to drive up prices*essentially creating a market power situation
in which energy buyers are left with little choice but to pay exorbitant
prices.

The report cites Dynegy as an example. Dynegy and NRG Energy Inc. are involved
in a joint venture called Cabrillo Power, which oversees the operation
of the Encina power plant in Carlsbad, Calif.  McCollough reports that
the Encina plant operated at well below its full capacity for much of June,
even though wholesale prices were well above the generating plant's cost
of production. A representative from Cabrillo Power denied that the Encina
plant had been used to game the system in this way, and stated that, in
fact, the plant was often in danger of being shut down last summer due
to heavy output.

The response to both McCollough's and the PX's report has been very mixed.
One camp remains steadfast in claiming that western states did indeed have
a supply shortage this summer, which was the primary reason for the high
prices. People in this camp also claim that data from the EPA about power
plant emissions are questionable. On the other hand, other investigations
continue, following the same claim that generators have gamed the system.
The central question to be answered is whether or not companies that generate
and/or trade power held back power from the California PX in order to force
heavier use of real-time markets at higher prices. Certainly, wholesale
providers knew that their power had to be dispatched and understandably
they were pleased by the high price of power this summer. Yet this is not
the same thing as purposeful manipulation, which has not been officially
determined. FERC and the CPUC have been examining these claims since July,
and the California attorney general also has initiated an investigation.
At this point, there is no clear answer*only a lot of questions and one
independent report that has made questionable assertions.

===============================================================
Discover a world of utilities information in our new e-zine, SourceBook
Online. Get a free SourceBook Weekly article at:
http://www.consultrci.com/web/rciweb.nsf/Web+Pages/SBEntrance.html
===============================================================

SCIENTECH is pleased to provide you with your free, daily IssueAlert. Let
us know if we can help you with in-depth analyses or any other SCIENTECH
information products. If you would like to refer a colleague to receive
our free, daily IssueAlerts, please reply to this email and include their
full name and email address or register directly at:

http://www.consultrci.com/web/infostore.nsf/Products/IssueAlert


Sincerely,

Will McNamara
Director, Electric Industry Analysis
wmcnamara@scientech.com
===============================================================
Feedback regarding SCIENTECH's IssueAlert should be sent to 
wmcnamara@scientech.com
===============================================================

SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts are compiled based on independent analysis by 
SCIENTECH
consultants.  The opinions expressed in SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts are not
intended to predict financial performance of companies discussed or to
be the basis for investment decisions of any kind.  SCIENTECH's sole purpose
in publishing its IssueAlerts is to offer an independent perspective regarding
the key events occurring in the energy industry, based on its long-standing
reputation as an expert on energy and telecommunications issues.

Copyright 2000.  SCIENTECH, Inc.

If you do not wish to receive any further IssueAlerts from SCIENTECH, please
reply to this message and in the body of the email type "remove."