Yeah I'm only thumbing through this but it looks like its nothing but direct costs.
I used to work as a contractor at Humboldt Bay decommissioning the nuclear generating station. Your states irrational fear of nuclear forced pacific gas and electric to put in large gas turbines instead. California wants their wind turbines and solar panels, but is unwilling to compromise on nuclear power, thus they hurt for energy and have to endure more greenhouse gases. Hypocrites abound.
We try to tell the environmentalists that their conventional green energy sources are not fully dispatachable power supplies, but that concept seems to elude them.
Nuclear power won't happen in California for decades if not generations, the Fukushima crisis solidified that.
Americans, and people in general, do not want to accept that when handled properly Nuclear is, basically, the best energy source we can tap right now. Unfortunately specific tragedies (Fukushima (natural disaster), Chernobyl (Shitty russian parts/workers), 3 Mile Island) will continue to bolster the populace's fear of nuclear power. It's a damn shame.
The cost of doing business in a dense area like California is always going to be higher than in the less developed parts of the US, that's just basic economics.
Unless of course you're referring to the density of our politicians when it comes to fiscal accountability, then I would have to agree with you.
---------- Post added 2012-05-01 at 04:09 PM ----------
Admittedly I'm not very well schooled in economics, but how does an already developed infrastructure and plentiful human resources drive prices up in the first place?