The Cost of Natural Gas [was Re: The Cost of California Liberalism]

[auto58194 at hushmail.com]

"Raymond D. Mereniuk" wrote:
 
> Actually if California had been building power plants in recent years 
> we would not have this short term price issue.  If they had built a 
> power plant they would have committed to a supplier of natural gas 
> who would have arranged a supply (drill wells) and arranged 
> delivery (build pipeline capacity).  The problem now is no one in 
> California made commitments so the market did not build supply 
> and delivery capacity. California consumers are now forced to 
> purchase their requirements in a commodity market causing the 
>current distortions.

Huh?  Let's make this simple.  How is California's lack of power plants 
causing natural gas prices to rise?  Plants that don't exist don't use gas 
and don't contribute to shortages. 

California's importing power from elsewhere, so why didn't these other generators 
commit to natural gas suppliers?  

Hint: transmission losses aren't a recent discovery.   

Either you're confused or you're trying to use the cold winter as an excuse 
to create a strawman for your anti-Californian views.  

Tim, Jim and Bill have already given good responses to the economic side 
of things, so I won't comment further in that vein.

> It would be nice if Californians took responsibility for their lifestyle,
> built the power plants in California and dealt with environmental
> issues themselves.  You have a choice, if you don't want power
> plants, don't use power.

Or:

It would be nice if everybody took responsibility for their lifestyle, took 
care of their own power needs and dealt with environmental issues themselves. 
  You have a choice, if you don't want higher power bills, don't use power.