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

[auto58194 at hushmail.com]

At Sun, 24 Dec 2000 23:50:01 -0800, "Raymond D. Mereniuk" <Raymond at fbn.bc.ca>
wrote:

>In my initial message I stated the current rise in natural gas prices
>are caused by multiple factors.  [blah blah blah]

That's outright bullshit.  You wrote: "The bad decisions of the citizens 
of California have produced an energy crisis in what is called the Northwest 
for which all citizens in what is called the Northwest must 
pay the price."  You said nothing about other factors.  Nothing at all. 
 

You also ignore that your subject was  "The Cost of California Liberalism." 
 That was your point, wasn't it?  To blame California Liberalism for your 
home heating bills?  

>On top of these factors I stated the greater portion of the increase
>was created by un-expected demand in California.

Greater portion in what terms?   Land area?  Population?  IQ?  Ralph Nader 
voters?  It's an easy game to play when your claims are based on things 
like a whole bunch of Californians using more power than relatively few 
Vancouverites.  And how much of this unexpected California demand was caused 
by California Liberalism?   Have Sierra Club members been baking lots of 
extra cookies lately?  Or is it all the electric cars that are selling like 
hotcakes?  No, I got it, all those people living in trees to keep them from 
getting cut down to be used for firewood are forcing people to use their 
electric heaters, that's it, right?

Or are you just going back to blaming Californian Liberals for preferring 
natural gas for electric power generation and saying it's their fault that 
you use the same fuel source to heat your home?

>Coupled with the low water situation, and the resulting decrease in
>hydro generated power, the increased use of natural gas powered
>generating capacity would be expected to cause an increase in the
>price of a commodity in which the increase in demand was
>unexpected or exceeded supply.

No shit, but what does this have to do with California Liberalism?

>If a power generating utility had built new power plants and
>commited to a fuel supply (and the accompanying infrastructure) the
>likelihood of unexpected prices increases would be much lower.

So?   As you now admit, the demand was unexpected.  Why would a utility 
build a new plant and commit to a fuel supply for unexpected demand?   You 
say they're using reserve natural gas fueled plants to meet unexpected demand. 
 Isn't this what they're supposed to do?  

Do you actually expect power utilities to build plants and commit to fuel 
they don't expect a need for just to provide a buffer for natural gas prices? 
  That's not what happens in a deregulated environment and I don't think 
California's electric utility deregulation is considered a result of California 
Liberalism.  Is it?