Decius wrote:

] It is presently cheaper to heat my water with gas then with
] electricity, but if the price of gas went up, it would be
] cheaper to heat it electically, and that power may come from
] coal, but it might also be nuclear

From the DOE:

---

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/ipp/ipp_sum.html

Five-Year Summary

For the 2001 through 2005 forecast period, electric utilities reported plans to add 44,726 megawatts of generating capacity in new units to their systems. Ninety-one percent of this total is gas-fired capacity.

In addition to adding new generators to their capacity, electric utilities reported several types of proposed changes to existing generating units for the 5-year period, 2001-2005. They proposed 55 electric generating units (19,300 megawatts) for either a fuel change, a rerating in capability, a repowering or life extension, or a combination of these. There are also plans to retire 5,247 megawatts of capacity. Projections of electric utility generating capacity, based on utilities' reported 5-year outlook of new generator additions and existing generating unit changes are presented in Figure 12.

---

Admittedly, this is a forecast. From the same page:

In 2000, the primary energy sources for US electric utilities:

43% Coal
19% Gas
14% Nuclear
12% Renewable
7% Petroleum

So basically 70% of our grid was based on fossil fuels in 2000. And 91% of the projected growth through 2005 is attributed to natural gas alone. Considering the trouble they had last year getting the natural gas reserves filled, is that really a sane energy policy?

Point being, if you think you have an option with respect to switching from gas to electric if gas becomes more expensive, and you don't think you will pay higher prices for the electricity as well, you're in for sticker shock.

RE: Observations and the State of Affairs - Peak Oil