|
|
|
|
|
R Street Releases Scorecard On Retail Electric Competition
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
R Street released a policy study on electric competition which included grade rankings for each state
The policy study considered factors such as traditional retail choice, and the design of such, as well as other competitive or consumer choice policies, such as utility procurements, RTO membership, aggregation of customer-sited resources into wholesale markets, consumer and aggregator access to usage data, and similar considerations
In describing electricity competition, the R Street report states, among other things, "utilities should be fully removed from competitive endeavors. They should not have affiliates engaged in competitive markets."
The policy study also says the following concerning municipal aggregation: "Another option to promote competition and customer empowerment is community choice aggregation (CCA), in which local governments provide electricity to residents of that area and competitively procure supply on their behalf. CCA is similar to retail competition, except that the government procurer acts as an intermediary for consumers, seeking out competitive rates and preferred sources of generation. In some jurisdictions, customers take part in CCA on an opt-out basis. With the exception of Texas, the states that have the largest proportion of residential customers being serviced by third-party suppliers have achieved that status because of CCA. However, states should be mindful of the risk that retail competition could devolve into a limited choice between a rate-regulated monopoly utility and an opportunistic government procurement entity. A broader range of competitive options are essential to keep both models accountable and responsive to customer needs."
Of the states with some form of retail electricity access, grades were as follows:
With regards to Texas, the report notes that retail choice is not available at the non-ERCOT IOUs or at any muni or co-op that does not opt into choice
Also with regards to Texas, the report suggests that, "The PUC could expand support
for languages beyond English and Spanish to reach additional minority
population."
Regarding New York, the report states, "The
state should mandate ESCO-consolidated billing and, if done correctly,
it might terminate the purchase-of-receivables program."
The report also graded non-restructured states, considering the non-retail-access factors described above. No non-restructured state received a grade higher than a C
Link to full scorecard and report
Chris Ercoli, president and CEO of the Retail Energy Advancement League (REAL), said of the report, "This scorecard offers lawmakers and regulators in almost every state a clear, comparative assessment of how well they’re serving residents with electricity options -- and, more importantly, where there’s room for improvement."
"The results of this state-by-state analysis further highlight the limitations of monopoly utility markets when compared to restructured markets. Competition applies downward pressure on prices, drives innovation, empowers consumers, and enhances accountability -- all while reducing exposure to unnecessary utility risks," Ercoli said
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
May 22, 2025
Email This Story
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
R Street Policy Study (Electricity)
Arizona C-
California C+
Connecticut C+
Delaware B
District of Columbia B+
Illinois B+
Maine B
Maryland C
Massachusetts B-
Michigan C
Montana C-
Nevada D+
New Hampshire B-
New Jersey B-
New York C+
Ohio B+
Oregon C-
Pennsylvania B+
Rhode Island B
Texas A-
Virginia C+
|
|
|
|
|