20080806Response to Order.pdf

BEFORE TH IDAHO PUBLIC UTLITIS COMMSSIONr:,ECE
IN TH MATTER OF TH APPROPRIATE
DISPOSITION OF PROCEEDS FOR TH
SALE OF IDAHO POWER COMPANY'S S02
EMISSION ALLOWANCES IN CY 2007
J
J
J
l
IEEP Response to
ORDER NO. 30577 H¿~:Jg)UTIUilto
CASE NO. IPC-E-08-11-
-5
On behalf of the Idaho Energy Education Project (lEEP), I would like to tha the
Idao Public Utilities Commssion for having the vision to open thi docket to assess the
proposas on how best to proceed wih the implementation of energy education in the
Idaho Power service area. It is IEEP's wish that the $500,000 of the S02 sales money
allocated for energy education be used in the most effcient and effective maer..
The idea of investin money in energy education is very consisent with the
followi goals of the 2007 Idao Energy Plan:
4. In order to protect and enhance Idaho's qualit of life, it is incumbent on all
citizens to use Idaho's precious natural resources, including energ, in a wise and
responsible manner.
5. When acquiring resources, Idaho and Idaho utilitis should give priority to: (1)
Conservatin, energ efficiency and demand response; and (2) Renewable
resources; recognizing that these alone may notfulfll Idaho's growing energy
requirements.
7. It is Idaho policy to encolLrage the development of customer-owned and community
owned renewable energ and combined heat and power facilities.
How better to achieve those goal than through education. There is no better place to
begin ths education tha with the young in our schools. A K-12 program helps creates
the interest not only in using energy in a wise and responsible maer, but helps to
develop a lifetime interest in energy related issues and possibly entering careers in
engineering, architecture or some other techncal aspect of energy effciency or
renewables. Shortages of qualified people have already been identifed and added to that
are the nea term retirement of thousds of those already workig in the electrical
industry. Money spent in K-12 education as opposed to spending that money at the
college level is much like purchasing a packet of seeds (25) vs. a 4-pack of plats for the
sae money.
The Idao Energy Education Project proposed from the star that the Idao State
Deparment of Education (SDE) and the Idaho Offce of Energy Resources (OER) should
be the admistrators of these fuds. They have both the struture and the staf to most
effciently implement thi project. Parnered wih Idao Power and the IEEP would have
given the project some added vision and expnence. SDE and OER have refused to
discuss this project and have in fact put a modified version of the ongin IEEP proposa
on the table.
Whle,lEEP welcomes their paricipation, we feel that their proposal could be
better, thus savig valuable time, money an opportty. Their proposa spends a good
deal of time and money on the assessment and development of curculum when
curculum already exists as well as teachers trained in that curculum. There ar various
teacher associations that could be tapped into as well to move at least portions of this
project along at a fater rater than the timelies in the OERISDE proposal.
The OERIOE proposal also alers the intent ofthe project portion ofthe onginl
IEEP proposa and thus par of the energy educational intent by focusing the projects
more on school admiistrators and less on the students; IEEP believes in getting as much
bang for the buck as we can and thus by involving the students in an energy effciency
project, not only do they gain hads on exprience, they ca also lea someg about
the issues that school admisttors fàe. A well thought out project not only
encompasses the afore mentioned but the school ends up with a more energy effcient
building and a more energy aware student body and a more energy aware communty.
The IEEP stil believe th the Ida Offce of Energy Resources an the Idao
State Dearent of Education ar the reasonable paries to adister this project and
would support their proposal if it more fully took advantage of existing curiculum and
traied teachers and if the project portion of their proposa would encompass the onginal
intent of involving the stdents more fully in the energy effciency projects.
Adjunct Proposal:
The IEEP does not want to hold this process up, but does want it to be effective
and effcient. If th Idao Offce of Energy Resources and The Idao Stae Depant
of Education ar not wiling to sit down wih other interested paries (i.e. Snae River
Allance, Idaho Rural CounciL, Idaho Conservation League and Citizns Protecting
Resources) and come to some ageement, then IEEP would propose tht since thi is a
pilot project tht $25,000 of the monies be se aside for evaluation ofthe OERISDE
progr Ths money would pay for the time and trvel of an evaluation tea made up
of a representative from the above mentioned paries. The team would review proposed
projects, mae site visits to the paricipating schools, visit with teachers and students
regardin the value of the curculum and discuss wi adsttors the impacts of th
projects. The commee would reprt back to the Ida Public Utilities Commission as
to the effectiveness of the program
IEEP would reiterte tht the money for th progr is neiter Idao Power
money nor taayer money. It is ratepayer money and may well be considered publi
interest money and that is why there needs to be either direct paricipation by public
interest groups in the program or at the miimum oversight and evaluation.
Submied thi 4th day of August, 2008
by Bil Chisliolmcoordintor
Idaho Ener.gyEducation Project