When does a monopoly hinder innovation? I would assert the answer is “always.” The American free enterprise system thrives on competition. The search for a better mousetrap has long been touted as the driver of innovation. Competition sends signals to the marketplace; signals which are read, interpreted, and responded to. Utilities were established as “natural monopolies,” deemed necessary to either prevent “waste” or to overcome large initial start-up costs. In granting utility monopolies there was a regulatory compact: in exchange for the monopoly the utilities agreed to be regulated to ensure market pricing and other market-like terms and conditions of service. But simulating artificial markets cannot substitute for the real thing. The natural gas industry has been partially “deregulated,” and competition has driven innovation and market pricing. The telephone industry has been partially deregulated and competition has driven innovation and lower prices. What can we expect when electric generation (but not distribution) is deregulated? Let’s get to it. If this is Michigan, where is the innovation?
© 2013 Varnum LLPEnergy Innovation: Monopoly vs. Competition
Boost: AJAX core statistics
- Primary menu
- Home
- Publish With Us
- Contributors
- About Us
- Contact Us
- Advertise
- Sign Up For NLR Bulletins
- QUICK LINKS
- Antitrust Law
- |
- Bankruptcy & Restructuring
- |
- Biotech & Cleantech
- |
- Business of Law
- |
- Election
- Construction & Real Estate
- |
- Environmental, Energy & Resources
- |
- Financial, Securities & Banking
- Health Care
- |
- Immigration
- |
- IP Law
- |
- Insurance
- |
- Labor & Employment
- |
- Litigation
- |
- Media & FCC
- |
- Tax
Related Articles
- Base-Erosion and Profit-Shifting – Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Report
- Can California Cap and Trade if Brussels Stumbles?
- Watt’s New? Michigan Energy News
- Exporting Pure Michigan: Time for Michigan’s Energy Supply Chain to Look Abroad
- FTC Voids Confidentiality and Non-Compete Provisions in Non-Reportable Transaction and Requires Notification of All Future Transactions
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Punts on Closely Watched Request to Order a Shale Oil Pipeline Interconnection
- New Law Expands Scope of Iran Sanctions In New Ways
- Los Angeles Kicks Off Its Feed-in Tariff Program
From This Author
Advertisement
Advertisement
Recent Contributions to the National Law Review
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC
Greenberg Traurig, LLP
McBrayer, McGinnis, Leslie and Kirkland, PLLC
McDermott Will & Emery
Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
U.S. Department of Labor
Greenberg Traurig, LLP
McDermott Will & Emery
Giordano, Halleran & Ciesla, P.C.
Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Risk and Insurance Management Society, Inc. (RIMS)






