Nobody's going to like it; Joe and Jane Sixpack least of all, for the same reason that "they" can't see past their wallets for other investments in the future (like, for instance, school district budgets). In fact, I'd be willing to guess that's a large part of why the system is in the condition it's in now.

You might be surprised. People are quite open to coughing up money for issues that affect them locally and directly, like schools. Even I have voted in favor of selected local tax increases for specific local school capital expenditures or local road issues.

Energy is no more of a permanent monopoly than anything else is. It's just a matter of prices and convenience driving new technology. Not that long ago I remember people saying that the phone company would forever be a monopoly since it required lines. If I had told them that in a couple of decades people would be using pocket phones for their long-distance use, they would have thought I was nuts. There is a definite niche for something like a rugged, low-cost solar cell or cheaper natural gas fuel cells, and I have been following the technology in several areas. I would really like to see a study of generating efficiency comparing a town with many local natural gas (not hydrogen) fuel cell generators (can they be "throttled?") vs. a central natural gas power plant using combustion and transmission lines.

A real issue is that the modern environmental movement has made it difficult-to-impossible to create any form of large new energy infrastructure, especially if some corporation is involved. You can't build power plants. You can't build new transmission lines. Hell, you can't even build renewable energy dams and windmills.

It would be highly instructive to take projects like the Hoover Dam, the Golden Gate Bridge, or pretty much any major historical construction project, file enough of the serial numbers off them to make them a bit more anonymous, and submit them for environmental approval.

Another issue is the interconnected systems that make different power grids susceptible to problems on other grids. While interconnecting systems makes very good sense when one is trying to save energy and money, it has also resulted in the decay of localized energy generation systems.

When I moved to my home town in Minnesota at the age of about thirteen, the town took electrical power off the statewide grid, but there was a small generating plant downtown, its generators proudly displayed through large glass windows, just in case. Later, this plant was dismantled. I wonder how many other towns had such systems.

Decentralized power production (many small plants) would result in more reliable systems overall, but given the difficulties in modulating electrical production and in storing excess power, there would also be a lot of new inefficiency. When my town's power plant is pouring out more than is needed, and your town is having a brownout, that's not good either. Then, to make it even more difficult, throw in the energy losses involved in transmitting power over long distances, which is a plus in the decentralized power column.