[roenxi]

The basic argument on Texas seems to be: "Texas avoided 75% of the costs in California by doing everything differently. California can't learn anything from them because they do things differently". That seems like a weak argument. California would have to do things quite differently to get a 75% cost reduction.

It is stereotyping, but it sounds like the sort of state that has a strong regulatory regime that would be quite controlling about what people can actually do. I note the irony that when Texas had a power outage everyone wanted much more regulation to force changes to grid maintenance, but when California spends 4x as much and PG&E skips on grid maintenance everyone throws their hands up because they can't call for more regulation and are out of ideas. The regulation doesn't seem to have dodged the maintenance problems but I'd bet it drives the cost up.