PDA

View Full Version : [Dixonary] Round 2354: SIPHUNCLE [Definition List]


scott crom
November 11th, 2012, 04:07 PM
I'll have 2 and 6, please.

Scott

EnDash@aol.com
November 12th, 2012, 08:48 AM
If memory serves, it was the anti-nuclear and NIMBY people -- and they
succeeded in preventing the plant from opening only after all that money had
been spent (borrowed) in the expectation that it would eventually become an
income-producing reality. I think it was a political decision to transfer
the debt to LIPA because so much of it was based on ordinary LILCO
bondholders and shareholders, and the authorities had simply rendered their
investments worthless.

Public "authorities" such as the Port Authority, are generally not very
accountable, as they are political creatures. Most investor-owned companies
are far more accountable, and customers have a lot more influence over
private companies than public monopolies. You can dump your shares in Con Ed and
drive their value down; you can't really do much about LIPA except try to
make a political voice heard amongst all the other causes involving
government.

What I recounted was what I remember of the situation back years ago, when
it happened. Some of the details may be off a bit due to memory and the
passage of much time.


In a message dated 11/11/2012 10:43:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jfshart (AT) gmail (DOT) com writes:

Dick,
My curiosity is sparked (as it were) because I also live in Shoreham, but
one that will never host a nuclear power plant. Since the general store
closed our only commercial operations are the post office and the campground
where you'd better bring a solar panel if you want power in your tent.

So can you explain to this curious outsider who the 'wrong people' were
that interfered with 'normal market force'. Was it the ant-nuclear people or
the LIPA management or someone else? As you tell it, it sounds like LILCO
borrowed big for a project without fully assessing the risk and so went
under. So why is LIPA now saddled with its predecessor's debt, and how else can
it service that debt without cuts in expenditure elsewhere? And why is a
public entity like LIPA less accountable to its customers than an
investor-owned utility whose first responsiblity is presumably to its stockholders?

Jim