Archive for May, 2011

h1

Abnormal stock market returns for Members of the House of Representatives

May 25, 2011

Michael Giberson

A few years ago we mentioned a study, “Abnormal Returns from the Common Stock Investments of the U.S. Senate,” finding that U.S. Senators as a group outperformed the market in their stock holdings. The researchers are back now with a similar examination of the U.S. House of Representatives, titled, simply enough, “Abnormal Returns From the Common Stock Investments of Members of the U.S. House of Representatives.” The article appears in the journal Business and Politics.

ABSTRACT: A previous study suggests that U.S. Senators trade common stock with a substantial informational advantage compared to ordinary investors and even corporate insiders. We apply precisely the same methods to test for abnormal returns from the common stock investments of Members of the U.S. House of Representatives. We measure abnormal returns for more than 16,000 common stock transactions made by approximately 300 House delegates from 1985 to 2001. Consistent with the study of Senatorial trading activity, we find stocks purchased by Representatives also earn significant positive abnormal returns (albeit considerably smaller returns). A portfolio that mimics the purchases of House Members beats the market by 55 basis points per month (approximately 6% annually).

The authors suggest two possible mechanisms that may explain the market-beating performance, using nonpublic information or voting their portfolio. Members of Congress have access to nonpublic information relevant to the performance of stocks, and may use that information in trading. Alternatively, Members of Congress may “vote their portfolio” and thereby provide a boost to companies held in Congressional portfolios. The two explanations are not mutually exclusive, and of course maybe they’re just lucky.

An article at the Huffington Post drew attention to the result that Democratic members of the House did much better than Republicans did, about 9 percent annual returns above the market compared to 2 percent for the GOP members, and also that members with less seniority did better than members with more seniority.

(HT to Robin Hanson who pointed out the Huffington Post article on the topic.)

h1

Future of Lubbock’s power supply efforts heads to court, with Lubbock citizens paying lawyers on both sides of case

May 24, 2011

Michael Giberson

In January I mentioned that a municipal utility agency created as a kind-of public-private partnership between the West Texas Municipal Power Agency and Republic Power Partners was taking off in an unexpected direction and leaving more than a few locals wondering what was going on. In brief, High Plains Diversified Energy Corporation, the partnership, was created a year or two ago to find or build power plants to serve the WTMPA’s post-2019 need for power – 2019 is when existing wholesale supply contracts will expire – but in January it suddenly proposed purchase of two large and somewhat distant power plants with more than 3-times the generating capacity and more than 7 years sooner than necessary.

It may well be, as the HPDEC maintains, that it is getting a great deal on the power plants. But a few problems have sprung up: HPDEC wants to borrow $1.5 billion or so in municipal bonds to finance the purchase of the plants and necessary transmission enhancements, the City of Lubbock asserts the group doesn’t have the legal authority to do so. There will be a lot of excess power, and selling the excess power is complicated since there are limits to the sale of power to non-municipal customers when the power plants are funded by tax-exempt municipal bonds. Meanwhile, the city of Odessa, Texas, home of the two power plants, doesn’t want that property taken off the city’s tax rolls and has convinced the state legislature to protect its interests. Lubbock, WTMPA, HPDEC, and Odessa, among others, are headed to court today to get some clarification.

Charles Dunn, a local attorney blogging the developments at Lubbock Power Grab, notices that because Lubbock residents make up 85 percent of the WTMPA load, we’ll be on the hook for legal fees on both the WTMPA/HPDEC and City of Lubbock sides of the issue.

Here’s hoping they come to a quick settlement.

ADDED: That was quick. Headlines after the hearing, from the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, “Major electricity project can’t move forward, judge says“; from KCBD, “Judge kills $1.5 billion Lubbock power deal.” In essence the judge concluded that the public-private joint venture was not legally formed, so not only can it not be exempt from paying local taxes, not use eminent domain if needed for transmission, and not sell municipal bonds to raise oodles of cash, it can not and does not exist legally.

So, barring a rescue on appeal, the joint venture entity is dead and with it all the complications associated with the proposed power plant purchases.

Which just leaves the city of Lubbock’s municipal utility and the other members of the WTMPA with the complication of figuring how they will replace the wholesale power contracts with Xcel that expire in 2019.

h1

Massachusetts wants $22.5 million in tax breaks back from Evergreen Solar, company in dire financial condition

May 24, 2011

Michael Giberson

Happier Days, from The Boston Globe: "Evergreen Solar's CEO, Richard M. Feldt (right), says Governor Deval Patrick's commitment to solar power played a key role in the company's decision to expand in Massachusetts. (Photo by Ellen Harasimowicz for The Boston Globe/File 2007)"

Politicians show up, grinning for the cameras at groundbreaking, they come applauding the expansion announcement (and why not, public tax breaks and other policy support for solar power manufacturers were chief among the reasons the plants were built in the first place), but where are the toothy smiles of supporting public officials when the company closes the manufacturing plant down? Evergreen Solar, a prized clean-energy/green jobs catch of the state of Massachusetts thanks to some creative economic development work by state and local governments, is closing its manufacturing plant in Devens, MA.

According to one summary, “Among the incentives the state offered Evergreen Solar were a $15 million property tax break, a $7.5 million in state tax break, $2.7 million through a subsidized lease and $21 million in cash grants. Not to mention that the state spent $13 million in construction on roads and other infrastructure to support the plant.” Another report put the figure at “at least $43m in state aid.”

Massachusetts politicians no longer swarm the gates of Evergreen Solar; instead they send notice that they want the tax breaks back, seeking $22.5 million from a company that has been losing money so quickly that it may not survive to the end of 2011. And perhaps Massachusetts should not feel especially foolish, Evergreen managed to squeak out significant support from government entities in Germany (“grants totaling approximately $34 million at current exchange rates”) and China, too  ($33 million in state-owned company loans to Evergreen and a similar amount to its Chinese partner).

Just another warning sign that the business of promoting business with tax breaks and other local subsidies is fraught with difficulty.

h1

Keystone XL pipeline hyperbole heats up

May 23, 2011

Michael Giberson

Oh the hyperbole of it all:

In addition to pollution and harm to the environment, Keystone XL directly puts at risk the land of families across a full stretch of our country. The pipeline would cross through six states and several major rivers, in addition to the Ogallala Aquifer, which supplies clean water to two million Americans. The present Keystone pipeline has already experienced 7 leaks, making the question when, not if, Keystone XL will also have a disastrous spill.

(Note: The link to Mother Jones was in the source document.)

The present Keystone pipeline “has already experienced 7 leaks,” but it isn’t obvious that any of the 7 have been disastrous, except perhaps at a very local level, so why expect Keystone XL to have a disastrous spill?

The most recent event, a pumping station problem in North Dakota, “caused the spill of about 500 barrels of oil … Most of the spilled oil was contained by a berm around the pumping station but some oil mist had to be cleaned from standing water in a nearby field… an environmental geologist with the North Dakota Health Department’s water quality program said groundwater contamination does not appear to be an issue.”

Not to alarm anyone, but the Ogallala Aquifer is already crossed by hundreds of miles of crude oil, petroleum product and natural gas pipelines. There have been pipelines crossing the aquifer for years and years. Find a pipeline map on the internet, see for yourself. These pipelines leak from time to time, and sometimes the effects are locally serious. Nonetheless, even an anti-pipeline filmmaker/political activist/Huffington Post -columnist trying to exaggerate the potential risks of another pipeline couldn’t avoid the fact that the aquifer continues to supply clean water to two million Americans. It must not be that risky, right? I’m guessing that all six states and each of several major rivers, too, have survived being crossed with a pipeline or two.

h1

Cheap natural gas upsetting wind development plans, and other energy stories

May 23, 2011

Michael Giberson

Energy stories from around the web.

  1. Financial Times, Gas threat to wind farm growth – “Construction of new wind farms in the US is set to decline next year because of competition from cheap natural gas for power generation, the country’s largest developer of new wind power projects has said.”
  2. Greentech grid, California ISO opens new high-tech control room - “We partnered with Google and we went from your typical map board made of plastic tiles, with digital readouts, to an 81-foot video display wall.”
  3. Reuters, “Japan eyeing plan for solar panels on all new buildings-Nikkei” – Japan may this week announce proposal to require all new buildings to have solar PV panels by 2030.
  4. San Antonio Express-News, “Eagle Ford’s calling card: help wanted” – Fracking not just for natural gas. Oil from shale big in South Texas. “But drilling in the Eagle Ford, a 400-mile-long formation stretching from East Texas to Webb County, has touched off a hiring frenzy in South Texas that is generating thousands of jobs. Now, drilling is moving so swiftly that the scramble for workers has caught some short.”
  5. Houston Chronicle, “Nat gas feud pits prosperous N. Texans against energy industry” – Oil and gas wells not always the best of neighbors.
  6. Reuters, “Chesapeake handed record fine for Pennsylvania gas drilling” – The company was fined a total of $1.1 million for problems at two sites in Southwestern Pennsylvania: $900,000 for seepage from non-shale shallow gas formations due to a poorly-done well casing and cementing job, and $188,000 for violations associated with a fire that injured 3 workers. (See also this Associated Press story.)
  7. Houston Chronicle reporter Richard Dunham, “Why Washington is no help at the pump” – Dunham says “politics as usual” is causing Washington to be of no help in solving our energy problems. (My view: For the most part we’d be better off without Washington trying to “help” consumers. If politics-as-usual is keeping Washington out of the energy business, that is probably a good thing.)
  8. William O’Keefe at the FuelFix blog, “3 Myths About Breaking U.S. Oil Habit” – Counter to some prevailing wisdom (while at the same time affirming popular views held by others) about climate change, energy independence, and resource scarcity.
  9. The Hill’s E2-Wire, “Greens, industry draw battle lines in fight over oil pipeline” – More on the political maneuvering surrounding the Keystone XL pipelines. Environmentalists are mostly opposed to the pipeline since it will mostly be supplied from the Alberta tar sands, and environmentalists are mostly opposed to tar sands development.
h1

Waxman to Koch Industries: “Are you now or have you ever been a capitalist?”

May 22, 2011

Michael Giberson

From The Hill’s Energy & Environment blog, “House Dems: Koch brothers could benefit from oil pipeline approval“:

Top Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee want to know whether the Koch brothers stand to benefit from the approval of a controversial oil sands pipeline.

Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the committee’s ranking Democrat, and Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), the ranking Democrat on the Energy and Power subcommittee, called on Republicans on the panel to request documents from Koch Industries detailing how the company might benefit from the pipeline.

Republicans on the committee are holding a hearing Monday on draft legislation that would require President Obama to make a decision on a permit for the project, known as Keystone XL, by Nov. 1.

“We are writing to request that in preparation for the hearing on and markup of this draft legislation, the Committee request documents from Koch Industries relating to the company’s interests in Canadian tar sands and the extent to which it will benefit if the Keystone XL pipeline is constructed,” the Democrats write in a letter sent to committee Republicans Friday.

Later, also from The Hill’s E2 blog, “Koch, GOP fire back at Waxman over oil sands pipeline inquiry“:

Koch Industries and House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans are criticizing Rep. Henry Waxman’s (D-Calif.) probe of whether Koch stands to gain from a proposed pipeline to import Canadian oil sands – a project that Republicans hope to expedite with legislation.

… A Koch executive, in a statement Friday afternoon, reiterated that the company has “no financial interest” in the pipeline project, and neither supports nor opposes the pipeline, which would expand U.S. imports from Alberta’s massive oil sands projects.

“Given these facts, we are confused about why Koch is being singled out and inserted into these discussions,” said Philip Ellender, the company’s president for government and public affairs.

However, Friday’s letter from Waxman and Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), the ranking Democrat on the Energy and Power Subcommittee, casts a wider net.

They are seeking information about whether Koch or subsidiaries have investments that would benefit from the pipeline, even though they’re not involved in the Keystone project itself.

Specifically, Waxman’s letter to Upton says the committee should seek documents about whether Koch has investments in oil sands or plans to invest, and whether they are involved in production from the oil sands.

A copy of the Waxman letter is posted on the House Energy committee website.

I’m trying to imagine what substantive difference it makes to the law and regulatory policy considerations surrounding the Keystone XL pipeline project whether a Koch Industries-affiliated company is or will be involved in the project, or will indirectly gain from it, or instead BP or Shell or Marathon or Valero or CITGO or one of the other handful of multinational companies involved in refining oil in the United States ends up indirectly or directly benefiting.

Does Mr. Waxman really want to suggest that his opinion on the Keystone XL project depends upon whether or not the companies involved, or their owners, support political causes he doesn’t like?

h1

“How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect”

May 21, 2011

Michael Giberson

New in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, a paper showing how the “wisdom of crowd” effect can be undermined when members of the “crowd” are given information about what the rest of the crowd predicted. Averaged or full information about others’ predictions tended to narrow the diversity of predictions in subsequent trials without improving the accuracy of the average prediction.

See a longer discussion “Sharing Information Corrupts Wisdom of Crowds” at the WIRED Science blog. HT to Mark Thoma, Economist’s View.

Citation: Jan Lorenz, Heiko Rauhut, Frank Schweitzer, and Dirk Helbing, 2011, “How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect,” PNAS, Doi: 10.1073/pnas.1008636108.

Abstract: Social groups can be remarkably smart and knowledgeable when their averaged judgements are compared with the judgements of individuals. Already Galton [Galton F (1907) Nature 75:7] found evidence that the median estimate of a group can be more accurate than estimates of experts. This wisdom of crowd effect was recently supported by examples from stock markets, political elections, and quiz shows [Surowiecki J (2004) The Wisdom of Crowds]. In contrast, we demonstrate by experimental evidence (N = 144) that even mild social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect in simple estimation tasks. In the experiment, subjects could reconsider their response to factual questions after having received average or full information of the responses of other subjects. We compare subjects’ convergence of estimates and improvements in accuracy over five consecutive estimation periods with a control condition, in which no information about others’ responses was provided. Although groups are initially “wise,” knowledge about estimates of others narrows the diversity of opinions to such an extent that it undermines the wisdom of crowd effect in three different ways. The “social influence effect” diminishes the diversity of the crowd without improvements of its collective error. The “range reduction effect” moves the position of the truth to peripheral regions of the range of estimates so that the crowd becomes less reliable in providing expertise for external observers. The “confidence effect” boosts individuals’ confidence after convergence of their estimates despite lack of improved accuracy. Examples of the revealed mechanism range from misled elites to the recent global financial crisis.

h1

ERCOT reliability monitor issues report on the February 2 rolling blackouts

May 20, 2011

Michael Giberson

The Texas Reliability Entity has issued its report on the ERCOT extreme cold weather events and rolling blackouts of February 2, 2011. Texas RE is the NERC regional entity for the ERCOT power system and contracted to the Public Utility Commission of Texas to serve as ERCOT reliability monitor for the state agency. In this latter role it was asked by the PUCT to report on compliance with ERCOT reliability rules during the cold weather event. (The ERCOT independent market monitor has already issued its report on market issues surrounding the February 2 event. See link to report, related KP post.)

In brief, Texas RE finds that ERCOT and ERCOT market participants took steps to prepare for the extreme cold, but the preparations were  not always adequate. For the most part it appears that parties complied with ERCOT protocols. In some cases, rules may have been violated and Texas RE is continuing to investigate. Texas RE notes it is working with NERC on further analyses of the events surrounding the rolling blackouts.

The report indicates that market participants were quick to learn from the failures of February 2. From the report at page 11:

Similar weather conditions occurred in the ERCOT Region on February 9-10; however, freezing equipment issues did not have the same impact as on February 2. ERCOT and many generation facilities implemented lessons learned from the February 2 event and prevented similar issues during the cold weather that followed on February 9-10. These lessons learned include improving winterization of the power plant equipment, starting combustion turbines further ahead in advance of severe temperatures to keep lube oil warm, and exercising moving equipment to ensure that the units will be available.

As previously noted here, powerful economic forces are already at work that will help avoid a repeat of February 2′s system emergency. Generator companies that did not deliver to the market the power they had committed day ahead suffered significant financial consequences (and similarly for retailers that had not contracted sufficient power in the day-ahead market to cover their customer loads, so ended up topping off at the extreme real-time market rate).

Here is the conclusion of the Texas RE report:

Texas RE’s investigation has revealed that, for the most part, ERCOT’s and Market Participants’ conduct during the Energy Emergency Alert that occurred on February 2, 2011, was consistent with requirements set out in the Protocols and Operating Guides. Loss of scheduled generation due to freezing pipes, valves, and instrumentation, and to a lesser extent issues associated with natural gas supplies, caused a shortage of generation reserves which ultimately required ERCOT to direct firm load shed in order to restore system reliability. Although ERCOT and Market Participants took steps to prepare for the expected cold weather, the actions taken proved to be inadequate or ineffective for the prolonged freezing weather which occurred February 1-4, 2011. However, ERCOT and many generation operators implemented lessons learned from the February 2 event and prevented similar issues during the cold weather that followed on February 9-10.

During the February 2 EEA Event, ERCOT Market Participants committed potential violations of the ERCOT Protocols and Operating Guides in connection with failures to meet Ancillary Services obligations, failures to meet Emergency Interruptible Load Service obligations, failures to execute manual load shed in accordance with requirements, and possibly with the performance of Black Start units. Texas RE will conduct additional investigations as necessary to determine the full extent and implications of non-compliance with the Protocols and Operating Guides, and will forward information to the PUCT for further action, as appropriate. Issues of possible noncompliance with NERC standards are being examined as part of Texas RE’s analysis in its capacity as the NERC Regional Entity for the Texas Region.

h1

Bonneville Power Administration says no to negative prices again

May 20, 2011

Michael Giberson

The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Administrator has adopted interim Environmental Redispatch and Negative Pricing Policies to deal with potential overgeneration conditions on the BPA power system. In brief, BPA plans to employ “Environmental Dispatch” rules for operating the power system in a manner conducive to BPA meeting various legal and regulatory constraints; the BPA Negative Pricing Policy is “we won’t allow it.”

Excepts from pages 10-12 of “BPA’s Interim Environmental Redispatch and Negative Pricing Policies: Administrator’s Final Record of Decision,” May 2011, below. I haven’t yet read the 68-page long section “Negative Pricing Policy,” but am adding it to my summer reading plans.

Related:

From the BPA report:

The events of early June 2010 illustrate how the increase in wind generation has influenced the ability to manage high flows on the Columbia River. … In early June, however, a strong Pacific jet stream brought storm systems with heavy precipitation and runoff. Snake River streamflows nearly tripled, and Columbia River streamflows nearly doubled. The resulting flows exceeded those needed to meet flow and spill objectives for fish passage. Federal water management staff focus shifted to developing strategies and modifying operations to reduce excess spill and minimize excessive TDG production to the extent practicable.…

During this time, most Northwest thermal generation shut down or reduced to minimum operating levels. These generation owners obtained low-cost or free Federal hydropower to replace thermal generation. Thermal generation normally finds it economical to displace their fuel with lower-cost hydropower since they can store or conserve their fuel while they receive hydropower.

However, due to differing economic considerations, the roughly 3,000 megawatts of wind power projects located in BPA’s Balancing Authority Area did not respond to the availability of free Federal hydropower. Wind power projects cannot store their fuel and are generally eligible to receive Federal Production Tax Credits (PTC) and/or state Renewable Energy Credits (REC). Wind power output ranged from zero to nearly full output, depending on wind conditions….

Unlike thermal operators, wind operators have an economic incentive to operate as much as possible, regardless of system conditions. The PTC is currently $21 per megawatt-hour (“MWh”) and state RECs are generally in the $8 to $20 per MWh range, so this incentive is significant. While all wind power projects are eligible to receive RECs for production, most new wind power projects have opted not to take the PTC and instead opted for the Investment Tax Credit (“ITC”) or other grants that provide up-front financial benefits tied to the cost of the project and not actual production. Wind power projects that opt for the ITC or other grants receive the full financial benefit of these incentives regardless of project output (pp. 11-12).

BPA believes that its statutory responsibilities and the objectives of the Northwest Power Act would be frustrated if BPA were required to pay negative prices in order to ensure compliance with BPA’s environmental responsibilities.

… While one purpose of the Northwest Power Act is to encourage the development of renewable power in the Pacific Northwest through BPA’s acquisition authority, that is one purpose among many that BPA must meet, including assuring the Northwest has an economical power supply, providing environmental quality, continuing to repay the U.S. Treasury on a current basis, and protecting, mitigating and enhancing fish and wildlife of the Columbia River and its tributaries. …

[P]aying negative prices to displace renewable generation to ensure BPA’s environmental responsibilities are met is neither socially optimal nor consistent with traditional principles of cost causation. BPA’s statutory preference customers would end up paying the costs of displacing renewable generation that is currently almost entirely serving the loads of utilities outside of the BPA Balancing Authority Area. The costs of Federal and state production incentives should be borne by a broad group of taxpayers and ratepayers receiving the wind power, not concentrated on smaller subsets of consumers with limited economic interest or benefits from the renewable generation.

Note that about 750 MW of wind capacity has been added to the BPA Balancing Authority Area since June 2010, to a current total of 3522 MW, and “as much as 3,000 MW of additional wind generation expected to come on line in the next few years” according to the report.

h1

Gasoline price gouging complaints spur Kentucky, Maryland attorneys general into action

May 19, 2011

Michael Giberson

Gasoline Prices for Maryland, Ohio, and Kentucky, April 20-May 19, 2011
Image: MDOHKYgasprices_APR20_gasbuddy hosted on Flickr. Chart created at GasBuddy.com.

Kentucky: Attorney General Jack Conway filed a motion last week seeking a temporary injunction to force Marathon Petroleum Co. to return its gasoline prices to April 26 levels, the date the state’s Governor declared a state of emergency due to flooding. From WLKY.com:

Attorney General Jack Conway accused Marathon of illegally raising the price of wholesale gasoline during a state of emergency due to flooding.

 ”The governor issued his emergency order on April 26 which put into place Kentucky’s price gouging law that says you can’t gouge on building supplies, you can’t gouge on hotel rooms and you can’t gouge on gas prices. Specifically we’re alleging they’re charging prices not based on their costs but instead based on their speculation,” Conway said.

… Conway wants an order forcing Marathon to roll back its wholesaler price to what it was before the emergency declaration.

On Monday a Kentucky judge declined to issue a restraining order against Marathon, saying he needed additional information. A hearing is scheduled for today. The motion was filed in Kentucky’s on-going price gouging case against Marathon, initiated in 2007 in response to gasoline pricing complaints post-Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in late 2005.

Kentucky law prohibits selling certain goods and services, including fuels, “for a price which is grossly in excess of the price prior to the declaration [of a state of emergency] and unrelated to any increased cost to the seller.”

Marathon claimed politics, as Tuesday this week was the state’s primary election and AG Conway was on the ballot; Conway dismissed the claim, saying he was unopposed in the Democratic primary. (Marathon noted that the 2007 case was filed by then Attorney General Greg Stumbo less than two weeks before the 2007 primary election in which Stumbo was seeking the Democratic nomination for Lt. Governor.)

In addition to the price gouging claims, the AG’s office has been pursuing an anti-trust investigation of Marathon. Coincidently, reports WHAS11 news, “Also Friday, the Kentucky Attorney General’s office announced it has completed its three year investigation of the 1996 merger of Marathon Petroleum with Ashland Oil.   Kentucky will forward the findings to the U.S. Justice Department.”

The Kentucky price is the green line in the chart above. More from LEX18.com, from WAVE3.com.

Maryland: Attorney General Douglas Gansler said Monday this week that he was “investigating a Rockville gasoline distributor after prices at the pump jumped 25 cents overnight last week.” Gansler noted, “Because Maryland lacks a price-gouging law… his office can do little beyond questioning distributors under consumer protection and antitrust law.” He doesn’t have price control authority, but he wants it:

Gansler said a state probe into gasoline prices could be stronger if Maryland had a tough price-gouging law. Twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia have passed such laws; efforts to pass one in Maryland have failed in recent years.

“It would allow an attorney general to issue subpoenas or issue inquiries to find out whether the price rise was justified or not,” and see what was behind it, he said.

My guess is that Maryland consumers are better off without state politicians having any ability or responsibility for deciding whether price increases are justified or not. (Note that Maryland does use it’s law enforcement powers to force gasoline prices higher when a store seems to be pricing too low.)

The Maryland price is in blue in the chart above. More on Maryland, from WJLA.com.

Elsewhere: In neighboring Washington, DC, “D.C. attorney general investigates gas station mogul” in response to allegations of anticompetitive practices. The DC AG said, “We have received allegations both from consumers and operators of stations that they are required to purchase at prices that are set on an anti-competitive basis…”

In New York, “A.G. Schneiderman Announces Comprehensive Review Of Gas Prices In Western New York.” The news release said:

Prices at the pump have led to an increase in consumer complaints to the Attorney General’s office, and Schneiderman has directed his staff to compile data on the prices charged by gas retailers, as well as information on the chain of distribution, to determine the cause behind the continued increases. Schneiderman cautioned that there may not be wrongdoing behind the price spikes, but said that if there is, he will take all appropriate action.

Another news release the same day said, “Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman has been selected to serve on the federal Oil and Gas Price Fraud Working Group, joining a national team in monitoring the costs of energy commodities for consumer abuses.”

Elsewhere, price gouging enforcement Hugo Chavez style: “Venezuelan officials and soldiers inspected a warehouse of U.S. agribusiness giant Cargill Inc.  on Wednesday as part of a crackdown on alleged hoarding and price-gouging with foodstuffs. … Chavez over the weekend urged ministers to hunt speculators and said he would have no hesitation in expropriating any companies found guilty.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 47 other followers