The off-season power shortage has caused everyone's concern and controversy over energy system issues. The fact that the power company borrows the name of the electricity shortage and raises the price is another analysis of the public's current power shortage, or a question. The system's coal price and electricity prices have caused various distortions in the market and increased economic operating risks and costs. It now appears that if the contradiction between coal and electricity is not solved as soon as possible, and electricity coal stocks are actually increased, the relatively large-scale power shortage in winter will be inevitable. It didn't take long, and when it came time to solve it, it was too late to transport coal.

The electricity shortage we now see is no longer caused by an emergency. The rush to transport coal every year has made us realize that why power plants can't be prepared early and increase the coal inventory before the peak period of coal consumption? Solving coal power inventories is an important issue that the government must immediately face. The price of electricity is set, and the slow rise in coal prices does have the effect of promoting the efficiency of electricity companies. The rapid rise in coal prices can only force electric companies to focus on the price of electricity.

Energy is a commodity, consumers should pay according to supply costs and consumption, which was originally a simple truth. However, energy is also a basic consumer product. Energy companies are basically state-owned. Their monopoly on state-owned energy resources and administrative pricing by the government complicate energy prices. At present, China's energy demand has grown rapidly, and the non-renewability of conventional energy sources has made energy prices a major trend. However, the increase in energy prices should be something that everybody is reluctant to see. Because of the impact of price increases on economic and social burdens, each price reform and price adjustment has been questioned by the public and the price after the price adjustment will not be satisfied. It will evolve into a multi-party game, where the government will often be discussed on which side, and it is even forced to participate in the game.

With the recent integration of the coal industry, China's energy is basically state-owned. For the government, large-scale state-owned coal mines merged with small private coal mines, and their safety problems, technical problems, and recovery rates could all be resolved quickly and the benefits would be immediate. And energy is basically state-owned, and energy prices seem to be more controllable. On the other hand, with the rise in labor costs and raw material costs, inflationary pressures have made energy prices more and more subject to control. For developing countries with rapid economic growth, energy price control clearly has its macro short-term sweetness, that is, the controllability of energy supply and price, but the controllability of energy has great social and economic costs.

For the public, due to the relatively opaque operating structure and cost structure of state-owned enterprises, state-owned monopoly industries are often considered to be tempted to "make the costs bigger." At present, state-owned enterprises in the energy industry are highly concentrated. How does the government and the public judge and believe their costs? This is why every price increase will be questioned. Considering that the energy industry has a relatively high income, the public can not understand every price increase, and they all feel that they suffer. In addition, energy companies are monopolistic and state-owned, and the public often uses the point that the company has already reached the point of non-price increase and cannot operate as a price increase. Because they do not understand the market's supply and demand and energy scarcity. The low energy price policy also ensures that China’s energy prices will rise all the way in the future (such as electricity prices). For ordinary people, even if they are subsidized, it is difficult to accept. If the rise in energy prices is a clear trend, government energy pricing without a price mechanism will make the energy price game the norm.

Compared with international counterparts, the overall efficiency of China's energy companies is still relatively low, and the energy price mechanism needs to bear the main responsibility. The current price mechanism has forced energy companies to assume some of the government's social functions, which has led to the government's inability to measure the efficiency of the enterprise objectively and to compare it with the international level. For energy companies, government pricing, in addition to assuming that the government's social functions make it independent of government and enterprises, the more important issue is that it cannot rely solely on improving management, technological innovation, and providing quality services to increase profits, but instead make profits. The focus is on the price game with the public and the government.

In the reform of the energy industry, the key is price reform. The biggest problem is rising prices. Although the price increase is not due to energy price reforms, the result of reforms is usually price increases. There are many reasons for rising energy prices. For example, the rise in international oil prices is uncontrollable; due to increasing scarcity of energy and environmental pressures, the rise in domestic energy prices is also a trend; the more clean energy, the more expensive. The level of technology is set, and improving energy industry efficiency is the only way to reduce price increases.

In general, the private and foreign capitals are encouraged to participate in the energy industry, and the efficiency of the energy industry can be increased by increasing competition. However, the limited state-owned enterprise competition not only cannot solve the efficiency problem, but also can amplify the efficiency problem. In the current situation where the state-owned enterprises are dominating and the energy government is pricing, investment liberalization is not enough to attract foreign investment and private entry. For example, the power generation side has been open to foreign capital and private enterprises for more than 20 years. It has not seen the large number of foreign capital and private enterprises entering, but saw the withdrawal of foreign investment. Private and foreign investment in the energy industry can set the bottom line and necessary financial discipline for the industry, provide a reference for the government to formulate energy prices and supervision, and, more importantly, can curb the government's impulse to use energy prices as a macro policy tool. .

State-owned enterprises have monopolized and administrative pricing, and energy prices have become a tool for government’s macroeconomic policies. It is also inevitable to impose the government’s social functions on companies. For example, as the consumer price index (CPI) goes up all the way, energy price adjustments can only lag behind, and state-owned losses must also guarantee production. If there are considerable private capital in energy companies, the government may have another approach because of shortages. The problem is even greater. The main danger of energy prices becoming the government’s macroeconomic policy tools is to distort prices. Energy is both a means of production and a source of livelihood. It is directly related to economic activities and people’s lives. Due to the importance, complexity, and sensitivity of energy, the cost of distorting prices is enormous. And long-term.

Another danger of energy prices becoming a tool of government macroeconomic policy is that energy price reforms will often be stranded due to various social and economic problems, thus depriving the reform of some important opportunities. Delaying energy price reforms will increase the cost of sustainable development, because if there is no viable energy alternative, if energy price distortions cause energy inefficiency or inefficient use, it means higher energy prices and greater environmental costs in the future.

In the process of development at the current stage, under the condition that energy prices cannot be marketized, ensuring energy supply requires a transparent, effective, and operable price mechanism and the same transparent and effective energy industry cost monitoring. Without a clear price mechanism, the risk of price expectations is not clear, and energy companies must play the game, play with the government, and compete with consumers. The current game of non-market behavior may have relatively stable energy prices, but it cannot guarantee energy supply and efficiency. Therefore, the game is costly and due to the energy state, eventually everyone will pay for it.

Solar Power

Easy Electronic Technology Co.,Ltd , https://www.nbpcelectronicgroup.com