20130205Comments (3 Total).pdf

Jean Jewell
From: secretary
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 8:49 AM
To: Barb Barrows; Jean Jewell
Subject: FW: Net Metering: new Idaho Power recommendations
From: James W. Thomas[SMTP:TH0MAS3WCABLE0NE.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 8:49:44 AM
To: secretary
Subject: Net Metering: new Idaho Power recommendations Auto forwarded by a Rule
Copies to:
Idaho Statesman: Letters to the Editor (abbreviated) Legislators, Legislative District 17
Dear Commissioners,
Please, Commissioners, ask IPCo to re-draft their net-metering tariff proposal ever so
slightly.
BACKGROUND
Last June, we fired up 24 solar panels on my roof, about 5kw capacity.
Scott Gates came to the house, we tested the inverter and had a nice chat. Solar is good
because those panels are putting energy on the grid during the heat of summer days when Idaho
needs it--air conditioners are running full blast and farmers are pumping water big time.
Residential solar projects are reducing amount of high cost spot market power we may have to
buy at a rate higher that 7cents/kWhr. Of course, the panels shutdown at night and I use
inexpensive coal and hydro power.
This is a HOBBY, to wit:
The cost is around $25,000.
At 7cents/kWhr my payback period is -.30 years. Hardly an "investment"
I chose this hobby because I just like the idea of my roof generating the energy I
use and, as a hobby, it is not life nor limb threatening.
Idaho Power folks explained their recommended net metering tariff. Results:
I appreciate the idea of increasing the customer charge to -'$21 preventing all rate
payers for paying for my wires and my meter.
Since that cost is removed from the energy rate, I appreciate reduction of the kWhr
charge to -'4cents/kWhr.
Last summer, I accumulated a $50 credit and used it in the fall of last year.
Maybe I'll have a net credit at the end of this year? I will frame the small check I
might get from Idaho Power.
WH00000PS!
1
Do I understand correctly that Idaho Power's tariff suggestion says I LOSE that credit at the
end of the calendar year? WHAT?
Insult to injury!
So, my daughter's inheritance spent on solar panels for a HOBBY means, if I have a surplus,
that Idaho Powers wants it at NO COST?
I am FORCED by IPC0 and the Commission to DONATE it to help pay for Idaho Power's overhead?
Why don't we do an efficiency study at the company and maybe we reduce their costs by twice
as much?
Please help me understand why they don't even want to pay those of us willing to put our own
$$ into solar for the little bit of surplus that might exist.
Is that Big Business bullying the little guy?
Please, Commissioners, ask IPC0 to re-draft their net-metering tariff proposal and allow
paying us the small credit we might build up during the year.
Thank you,
Jim
James W. Thomas
Boise
208.841.6393
"The educated mind never returns to its previous state..."
Jean Jewell
From: stadlersue©gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 5:42 AM
To: Jean Jewell; Beverly Barker; Gene Fadness
Subject: PUG Comment Form
A Comment from Sue Stadler follows:
Case Number: 'net metering'
Name: Sue Stadler
Address:
City: Garden City
State: Idaho
Zip: 83714
Daytime Telephone: [phone]
Contact E-Mail: stadlersuegmail.com
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Acknowledge: acknowledge
Please describe your comment briefly:
The 'net metering' program provides an important incentive toward the development of
sustainable green' energy. To allow Idaho Power to change the rules after hundreds of
people have invested in solar panels because of the net metering program is an unjust change
of contract. Allowing Idaho Power to eliminate the incentives provided by the net metering
program would also return customers to the 'good ol' days' of dirty power plants.
Hydroelectric power will not be sufficient to meet the needs of Idaho's growing population.
Idaho Power must look toward the future and endorse policies that promote sustainable sources
of energy, moving Idaho toward a time when it's people will no longer have to rely upon
fossil fuels and coal plants for energy. Allowing Idaho Power to change the rules regarding
net metering would be going backwards.
The form submitted on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/iuc1/ipuc.html
IP address is 70.196.192.242
1
Jean Jewell
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 9:45 AM
To: Jean Jewell; Beverly Barker; Gene Fadness
Subject: PUC Comment Form
A Comment from Leah follows:
Case Number: IPC-E-12-27
Name: Leah
Address: Osborn
City: Oreana
State: Idaho
Zip: 83650
Daytime Telephone: [phone]
Contact E-Mail: bluewindme.com
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Acknowledge: acknowledge
Please describe your comment briefly:
Thank you for allowing me to comment. I am however much less pleased with Idaho PUC. Do you
really think that fossil fuels is the fuel of the future. You surely must be blind to the
direction of what is long term and renewable. I do not support this case.
Leah Osborn
The form submitted on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/€€ipuci/€€€ipuc.html
IP address is 72.160.28.48
1