[thrill]

The quality of the decision made by either party does not invalidate that capitalism is a collection of voluntary activity. It's when government is involved that there is restriction on that activity, which frequently has unintended effects. If there is inadequate planning for future demand then prices may certainly vary more than is considered acceptable. Poor planning on a utility's part is not the fault of capitalism, but which seems to be the major point of the article and the original poster. Indeed, selling future contracts is generally viewed as a good way to stabilize future prices as it gives a signal as to general (market) consensus - if insurance for some activity is considered expensive then it should tell even the minimal of planners that an activity has unevaluated risk. An inability to act properly on such signals does indeed indicate poor planning on one party's part.

[Spooky23]

That's a very sophisticated way of saying that utility companies have some magical entitlement to say "Fuck you, pay me".

There's another answer that that a 5 year old could come up with, and happened to work very effectively for 75+ years: when the electrical grid is out of electrical transmission capacity, add more capacity.

Writing future contracts doesn't accomplish much, other than create jobs trading electricity, because the supply problem isn't generation, it's distribution. There is no market for electrical infrastructure.