Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Wallingford, CT
1,063 posts, read 1,363,010 times
Reputation: 1228

Advertisements

Never lost power here, thanks Wallingford Electric.

Everyone I know who had CL&P in North Haven only got their power back yesterday. I found that to be a bit much. A lot of people keep telling those without power that it could be much worse, or to just deal with it. I don't entirely disagree, but that's awfully easy for people with power or a generator and internet access to say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:20 PM
 
468 posts, read 523,975 times
Reputation: 456
Quote:
Originally Posted by JViello View Post


Update, they are up to 1540 crews out there now as neighboring states are freeing up more help to come here.

As for profitability, what many of you fail to or don't realize is the profitability of CL&P is directed by the D-PUC (Department of Utility Control). They literally are the ones who set the rates and profitability of the company. If there is an issue with that, that's who you need to take issue with.

They are currently merging with the newly-created Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. Those two departments in the same bed should shake CT folks to the core more than anything.
So if it takes 1540 crews to handle an outage like this, why did CLP only have 800 available?

The agencies you mention set the rates, but they don't to my knowledge establish standards for how many repair personnel have to be maintained. I am going to contact every elected official I can to suggest they not only should, they must.

JViello, why do you feel compelled to defend the power company? I honestly want to know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:22 PM
 
21,620 posts, read 31,207,908 times
Reputation: 9775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Csiko View Post
Never lost power here, thanks Wallingford Electric.

Everyone I know who had CL&P in North Haven only got their power back yesterday. I found that to be a bit much. A lot of people keep telling those without power that it could be much worse, or to just deal with it. I don't entirely disagree, but that's awfully easy for people with power or a generator and internet access to say.
I won't have power until next week, and I said that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:26 PM
 
Location: New England
8,155 posts, read 21,006,712 times
Reputation: 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamz View Post
JViello-
An editorial in today's Hartford Courant points out that CLP has half the number of crews working per customer without service than electric companies in MA, VA and NC.

Editorial: Connecticut had too few crews - Courant.com

I think that Northeast Utilities, the parent company of both UI and CLP, cut back on the number of line crews to save money and maximize profits. Linemen are paid well- they should be, it's dangerous work- and it's cheaper to not keep them on the payroll and plan to bring them in from other states. Except that in this storm, they couldn't do that in a timely fashion, because the other states were also affected.

I can't understand your motive for defending the electric companies. You've pointed out that we should have been prepared because they warned us that it could be two weeks. I agree: I should have been prepared. But what if they had warned us that it would be a year? Would you still be defending them? Please note that I'm not attacking the linemen, I'm criticizing the bean counters who I suspect decided to run with too few crews.

Electricity is essential for modern life, and I think that in the wake of this episode, the state government should set requirements for the number of line crews that UI and CLP have to maintain. This might seem an unwarranted intrusion of government into free enterprise, but given the monopoly that these companies have on power transmission, the only other reasonable alternative IMO is for government to take the lines over and make them public.
Few points to make.

1. That piece is an editorial, not an investigation with any kind of fact checking It's an opinion piece. I wish it was as easy as saying "see they had X per citizen and we had Y." What you might want to look into is why so many other crews went to those states and not ours. That's not a function of CL&P alone. Sometimes it's money, sometimes it's politics.

2. You can't compare state to state. You just can't. It's about the nature of the repair. A substation going underwater is a HUUUUGE problem compared to down primaries. Without knowing details, you really are just pissing in the wind.

3. Everything you are claiming and suggesting above is - no offense out of ignorance. The DPUC already does much of those things. The bean counters don't run anything in CLP, the DPUC rules. Period. I don't think you realize just how regulated utilities are. They are told what to charge, how profitable they can be, what facilities changes they can make etc. I remember working for SNET and we jumped the gun expecting approval of bringing a hybrid fiber/copper wire curbside for the state...it would have been a HUGE innovation. Fiber to every home? WOW! Yea, well the D-PUC said no, and we had to pull down MILES of wire. Retarded.

4. I'm not defending anything or anyone. As someone who worked for a public utility, I just know more of what it's like to be on the other side, what happens behind the scenes and see how belligerent the public gets and how ignorant they are. I literally can recall people screaming at me (Business side) to just have the engineers "throw the switch." as I'm trying to explain to them we did our job, it was their vendor who screwed up and that they can thank the DPUC for regulating/limiting us to not be able to do a thing for them.

That particular situation, it was a multi-tenant building and DPUC regulations said we are to supply service to the building demarcation point. They had the choice of hiring us to extend service to their office location, but that's considering "inside wiring". I warned them to be sure their vendor extended service. They did not, and it was "our" fault. Love it.

You and the article claiming to want government to fix this is pretty funny because it's the government that has CAUSED this through DPUC regulations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:36 PM
 
Location: New England
8,155 posts, read 21,006,712 times
Reputation: 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamz View Post
So if it takes 1540 crews to handle an outage like this, why did CLP only have 800 available?

The agencies you mention set the rates, but they don't to my knowledge establish standards for how many repair personnel have to be maintained. I am going to contact every elected official I can to suggest they not only should, they must.
You're asking faster than I can reply. See my post above.

However to answer your question specifically, it's Local 420 Union and the DPUC that are in fact causing this problem.

If said utility can't generate power because of legislation, they have to purchase it and resell. If said utility is told they can only charge X, that dictates their income. Now if Union 420 says workers demand Y pay...I think you can make your own conclusion here.

It's real easy to demonize the company, but when you really understand all the factors at work here, I think you'll find is the government and unions that are the real culprits...as it always seems in this state.

We have two...TWO beastly nuke plants here sitting pretty much idle. You want job creation? Fire those bad boys up and start exporting electricity from our state. The jobs that industry would create are anything but low paying. You're talking several thousand high paying jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:37 PM
 
Location: Coastal Connecticut
21,752 posts, read 28,086,032 times
Reputation: 6710
Union 420? No wonder they're so slow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:40 PM
 
Location: Montreal -> CT -> MA -> Montreal -> Ottawa
17,330 posts, read 33,032,639 times
Reputation: 28903
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkiv808 View Post
Union 420? No wonder they're so slow.
LMAO!!!! Clevah!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:42 PM
 
Location: New England
8,155 posts, read 21,006,712 times
Reputation: 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkiv808 View Post
Union 420? No wonder they're so slow.
I'm slow today (sick) I don't get it?

AFL-CIO to the rescue!

IBEW Local 420

ETA: Adamz here you go:
The Department's Electric Unit processes, in accordance with applicable statutes and regulations, all filings submitted by Connecticut’s two regulated electric distribution companies; The Connecticut Light and Power Company and The United Illuminating Company. These filings address such issues as distribution, transmission and generation rates, wholesale procurement of electricity, energy efficiency, conservation and load management, cost-of-service, rate design, revenue requirements, metering accuracy, and the safety and reliability of the electric distribution system. In addition, the Electric Unit is responsible for the licensing of electric suppliers, registration of electric aggregators, and the oversight of renewable energy and renewable portfolio standards.
PURA: Electric/Electric Restructuring

That's who you need to ring up, not CL&P
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:43 PM
 
21,620 posts, read 31,207,908 times
Reputation: 9775
Quote:
Originally Posted by JViello View Post
I'm slow today (sick) I don't get it?

AFL-CIO to the rescue!

IBEW Local 420
Weed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2011, 01:46 PM
 
Location: New England
8,155 posts, read 21,006,712 times
Reputation: 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidyankee764 View Post
Weed.
Duh! LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top