CELEBRATING NEW YEAR'S DAY

New Year's Day, January 1, is the strangest holiday. It is a holiday because our calendars say it is; and because most employees have this day off from work, except for employees of stores that remain open so that all employees who have the day off can have something to do.

New Year's Day also is strange because it is not a holiday that recognizes a religious, historic or patriotic event. But the strangest aspect of New Year's Day is that, unlike all other holidays, no one celebrates New Year's Day. Except for the Rose parade, some football games and reruns of the Twilight Zone, no one does anything on New Year's Day except eat too much.

The only celebrating that is going on is on New Year's Eve, the day before the holiday, and New Year's Eve is NOT a holiday.

So, why is New Year's Day a holiday, and why do people celebrate the day before, which is not a holiday. The truth is no one knows why we do this, except that humankind has always done it.

Of course, New Year's Day was not always January 1. In ancient times, the beginning of a year was determined by such events as the spring or autumn equinox or winter solstice. So, for example, in Egypt, about 2800 BC, the year started with the helical rising of Sirius, which coincided with the beginning of the Nile flooding.

New Year's was a time for some cultures to perform rituals to do away with the past and purify themselves for the coming year. Some extinguished fires they were using and started new ones. Celts were said to have built bonfires to send away evil spirits and to honor their sun god. In earlier times, Romans gave each other New Year's gifts of sacred tree branches. In later times, they gave gold covered nuts and coins depicting Janus, their god of gates, doors and beginnings. It must have been exciting to have received a gold nut.

So, it appears that the New Year's Day holiday and the New Year's Eve non-holiday are rooted in long standing pagan tradition. Since January was named after the Roman god Janus, who had two faces--one looking backward and one looking forward--perhaps there is some logic to the New Year's holiday: a time for looking backward and forward.

Along that line, it may be a time for reflecting on something every one experiences--aging. Scientists are zeroing in on "molecular mayhem" within cells of the brain for clues to the mysteries of growing old.* For example, breakdowns of proteins in the brain may be a significant cause of aging. Another factor may be the disorganization of DNA bundles. In the brain, stem cells have walls to keep out cellular junk. When these walls weaken, the junk can enter to hinder stem cell production. Another protective brain wall is the blood-brain barrier which protects the brain from toxins in the blood. If that wall weakens, brain cell can break down.

Of course, if one were to dwell on the aging process on New Year's Day, the holiday could be disquieting. Maybe that is why people today celebrate New Year's Eve--a day to party as if youth is eternal; and why New Year's Day is a holiday--a quiet day to recover aching bones and scrambled minds from all that celebrating. Yes, perhaps we all are like Janus at New Year's time--a bit two faced.

___________________________________________

* Rosen, "All Bodies Don't Act Their Age",
Science News, December 26, 2015, p. 20

GONE! WHAT HAPPENED TO SANTA CLAUS?

BREAKING NEWS.....Dateline December 25, 2050

Officials announced today the climate change agreement of all nations to ban Santa Claus from the Earth.

Under the agreement, authorities also have closed down Santa's workshop, seized his sleigh, and deported his reindeer from the North Pole to Finland.

Reached for comment, Santa declined comment on advice of his attorney. Mrs. Claus was quoted as exclaiming "What am I going to do? That old man now is going to be hanging around the house all day." One of Santa's elves, an officer of the Elves Union (EU) who asked not to be identified, said "We elves are now are unemployed and are in shock. We are short but have a long history. We will review our options."

Prior to 2015 and Climate Change Agreement I, carbon was pervasive. When Santa Claus made his rounds of houses, he came down the chimney with clothes all tarnished in ashes and soot. After the 2015 agreement, which banned carbon, Santa was able to come down chimneys free of pollutants.

Now, 35 years later, international governmental leaders have adopted Climate Change Agreement II to resolve additional issues with Santa Claus. Scientists have determined that, as Santa travels around the world, his reindeer produce excessive methane from belching and pooping, resulting in increases global warming. It is estimated that by the year 2100, the reindeer will have caused an increase in earth temperature of 0.01 degrees, unless remedial action is taken.

Even more serious, officials state, is that Santa's reindeer are leaving their chips and pies (poop) on top of mandatory rooftop solar panels of homes he visits. These deposits then block the production of electricity for the homes. Since there no longer is an electric grid or natural gas service, the result is that homes are without electricity for heating, cooking and lighting.

Therefore, government leaders concluded, it was necessary to ban Santa Claus in order to save the Earth.

For those who embrace the tradition of Christmas gift giving, governments are providing alternatives to Santa Claus. In the United States, the Affordable Gift Act was enacted, which provides for regional gift centers operated by government agency staff. Children will be able to select gifts from the centers, The centers will be funded by cash donations from adults, who then will receive tax credits as their gifts. Adults who decline to fund gift centers will pay an income tax penalty surcharge.

Authorities commented that under the terms of the Affordable Gift Act, the public will not miss Santa Claus at all, and the environment will be saved. "Those who once believed in Santa Claus can now happily believe only in government," one said.

One official was heard to say to an inquisitive little girl, "Yes, Virginia, there is no Santa Claus."

FIXING RATES TO RECOVER FIXED COSTS WHEN WATER USAGE IS DECLINING

Historically, public utilities--particularly water utilities--have designed rates to recover most, if not all, their costs of service through volumetric usage charges. Under such a rate structure, for example, customers pay a rate per 1,000 gallons, or per 100 cubic feet, of water delivered. Some water utilities also impose a fixed flat rate called a customer charge, designed to recover meter reading and billing costs. Except for the customer charge, which typically is quite small, all costs of service are sought to be recovered under rates which vary with usage.

This historical rate design can be problematic today. First, it assumes that almost all of the costs of water service are variable costs and that fixed costs are minor. In a water utility rate case before a state regulatory commission, the president of the company testified that 90% of the utility's costs actually were fixed costs, not variable costs. He said that variable costs were only such items as power, chemicals and possibly some labor and maintenance. Therefore, he argued for a larger customer charge to recover fixed costs. Regulatory staff in the room laughed and opposed any increase in the fixed rate. Was he correct? Are not depreciation, debt service, return on rate base and some labor and maintenance incurred regardless of the volume of water delivered?

A second issue with the historical rate design is declining revenue due to conservation,more efficient water appliances and usage restrictions. If most of the costs of water service are designed to be recovered from usage charges, and usage has declined, then revenue necessary to recover costs of service has declined as well.

Recently, the Wall Street Journal reported that electric utilities across the country are experiencing these issues and are seeking to resolve them by substantially increasing their fixed customer charges.* Regarding customer charges, "the utilities argue that the fees should cover a bigger proportion of the fixed costs of the electric grid, including maintenance and repairs." One utility official is quoted as saying "Since our cost to provide service is mostly fixed, we think our rate design ought to reflect that more accurately"

The Journal article stated "The problem for utilities is that many consumers are using less power these days, in large part because appliances and equipment are getting more energy efficient....The rise of rooftop solar power in some parts of the country also is chipping away at power sales."

The article cites an opposing view that a higher customer charge to recover fixed costs would be a disincentive to customers embracing rooftop solar power or cutting down on their usage of electricity. This assertion, however, would seem to beg the question as to the adequate recovery of fixed costs of service in view of declining revenue. Water rates, as well as electric rates, should be designed to enable recovery of all costs of service, not to satisfy social or political agendas. Substantial fixed costs are incurred by water utilities to enable them to provide water service to customers on demand.
Fair rate design should reflect that reality and obligation.

_________________________________________

*Rebecca Smith,"Electric Utilities Seek
To Raise Fees As Usage Declines", Wall
Street Journal, October 20,2015,p.B5