[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Just doing a calculation here 210 / 3290 is 6.4 % and 696 is 21%. I don't know what the total capacity into California but surely there must be other carriers.

If the Pipeline represents half of the total capacity into California then the per centage of total gas witheld would be %3.2 and %10.5. Certainly the gas price would go up and perhaps there wasn't enough gas to transport at the prices in the period previous to the period in question. I.E. Just the witholding of capacity would not seem to account for the large increase in prices .

[Looking for Diogenes]

Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline
Delivery Capacity to California
(Millions of Cubic Feet per Day)

Map Showing Western States' Natural Gas Pipelines

Pipeline	Current Capacity	Capacity Additions	2002 Total Capacity
PG&E El Paso Transwestern Kern River Southern Trails	1,920 3,290 1,090 700 --	200 500 -- 125 90	2,120 3,790 1,090 825 90
Total	7,000	915	7,915

http://www.energy.ca.gov/naturalgas/natural_gas_pipelines.html

[Looking for Diogenes]

I.E. Just the witholding of capacity would not seem to account for the large increase in prices .

El Paso didn't create the situation, they just profited from it by making it worse.

Regardless, this current decision has nothing to do with pricing. It concerns the obligation of a pipeline to carry its rated capacity.

The fact that El Paso owns natural gas production as well as transmission simply gave them the motive.