[bpodgursky]

I don't think you are correct. Here's another source: https://thetexan.news/texas-utility-regulator-increased-elec...

> “Because energy prices should reflect scarcity of the supply, the market price for the energy needed to serve load being shed in the face of scarcity should also be at its highest,” the PUC’s news release stated.

> The PUC added, “The decision was spurred by ERCOT’s discovery that energy prices across the system were clearing at less than the current system-wide offer cap of $9,000 established by Commission rule.”

> In addition, the PUC ordered wholesale prices be backdated to February 15 when the storm escalated circumstances in the state.

[sp332]

I don't blame them for doing whatever it took to attract electricity generation onto the grid. But passing the costs directly to customers seems like the wrong way to handle that side of the transaction. I think the difference should have been paid for as part of the overall relief package.

[stefan_]

I think the point is that no price would have made any extra electricity supply available. All this $9000 imaginary price did was provide the remaining generators with an extra $8000/MWh and causing a number of electricity wholesale buyers (far from only Griddy) to default.

It's not like any generator is making money having a power plant sit idle, they are losing tons. Any positive price is incentive enough, but no level of price can make whatever is causing the outage to be fixed in 4 days. The Texas grid is an entirely isolated system.