California's power shortages were certainly caused by free market pricing on the generation side, and government restricted, unsustainable pricing on the retail side. Price control NEVER works and will always eventually lead to shortages!

I don't see why the electricity industry is some sort of mystical "essential" being that can only operate effectively if state owned.

We certainly don't need public ownership of food production and distribution, which is an essential industry, so why is power different?

One could argue that the prices at present are too low due to the fact that sufficient re-investment in infrastructure is not occuring due to the special dividends which strip money out ot the industry into general revenue. Thus we do not have a sustainable position at present.

Having recent dealings with one of the generators, I think that having some profit motive would be great, as opposed to the petty tick off the boxes, focus on the most trivial matters attitude I encountered.

The decision regarding a future power station is needed now, due to the long lead time in developing such capacity. Coal is the only viable base load generating fuel we have at present, as long as the station is configured to be as efficient as possible, and can accomodate carbon capture, what difference (other than political grandstanding and ideological) does it make.

I just want the lights to come on when I want.

I wouldn't say it was because electricity generation and distribution was 'essential' that many have argued against its privatisation.
The big difference between food and electricity is that as a consumer I can easily and meaningfully choose between several different food suppliers, hence market forces can operate very effectively to ensure that high quality and low prices are maintained.
With electricity, it's simply not the case that I can decide I'm unhappy with the supply I'm getting from Loy Yang B or Liddell Power station and choose another (though I have chosen to go for 100% renewable energy - an option that undoubtedly would not be available were it not for government legislation and incentives). They're all connected to the same grid, and the resource is effectively pooled. In that sense it's more like water - no-one would (sanely) suggest that a city's reticulated water system should be entirely run a private operator whose was only obligation was to maximise shareholder profit: profit could obviously be increased by reducing the amount of expensive purification and testing needed to ensure water remained safe to drink and wash with, and consumers would have no realistic option to reject that product and choose a different supplier.