20131126Comments (14 Total).pdf

‘ASIIRRA
CwB
FeUN DED 1S92
November 25,2013
Idaho Public Utility Commission
P.O.Box 83720
Boise,ID 83720-0074
Re:Comments on Idaho Power’s CPCN Application,Docket #IPC-E-13-16
Dear Commissioners:
My name is Zack Waterman and I am the Director of the Idaho Chapter of the Sierra Club.I want to
first of all thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony tonight on behalf of the more than
2,000 Sierra Club members statewide,many of whom cannot attend this evening’s public hearing.
Our members have serious concerns regarding Idaho Power’s request to put ratepayers on the
hook for $130 million in new investments to the Jim Bridger coal plant.In short we do not believe
the risks to ratepayers have been properly accounted for,and we are deeply concerned about the
environmental and public health consequences of Idaho Power’s continued reliance on coal fired
electricity generation.
Given that not everyone in attendance this evening plans to offer public comment,including some
of our members,I would like to ask your permission to have a show of hands amongst those in
attendance who share our concerns.
To speak frankly,Idaho Sierra Club members believe that climate change is one of the greatest
threats facing our planet,communities,and way of life,and we are keenly aware of the significant
greenhouse gas emissions resulting from our continued use of coal fired electricity generation.Jim
Bridger is one of the single largest greenhouse gas polluters in our region and spews 14.7 million
metric tons of CO2 every year.
Jim Bridger also emits enormous amounts of mercury and fine particulates,among other pollutants,
that are responsible for enormous costs to our healthcare system.
Additionally,our members and supporters do not believe that Idaho Power has adequately
accounted for what it will cost to keep Jim Bridger operating for the next twenty years.In June of
2014 EPA will release new existing coal plant carbon regulations,and given that the technology for
carbon capture and sequestration has not been developed,the resulting compliance costs are
unknown.EPA will also be issuing new coal ash regulations that could cost ratepayers millions of
dollars more.
We believe that Idaho Power shares our concerns about the riskiness of this upgrade given the
many unknowns related to future regulatory compliance for existing coal plants.Lisa Grow,Senior
Vice President of Power Supply for Idaho Power,acknowledged the company would need to
seriously rethink the investments if the company is not given the assurance that it can recoup all
costs from ratepayers.
November 12,2013
Page 2 of 2
We agree that Idaho Power should rethink these investments,and we hope you ensure this happens
by denying the CPCN certificate and binding ratemaking treatment that Idaho Power has requested
in this docket.
I would like to reiterate,though,that we are even more concerned about what our continued
reliance on coal fired electricity generation will mean for our climate.We all appreciate living in
Idaho because of the quality of life our state affords us.We can fish and ski,backpack and hunt,and
we are determined that the quality of life we enjoy here today be passed along to our children and
grandchildren.
We believe that Idaho is blessed with significant,affordable,and unrealized renewable energy
resources and efficiencies that can help move us towards meeting our state’s energy needs with
while growing our local economies.By investing in these potentials rather than aging coal plants,
we will be advancing the goals of Idaho’s State Energy Plan,which says energy efficiency should be
Idaho’s first energy resource,followed by renewable energy and traditional fossil fuels only when
absolutely necessary.This is an opportunity for Idaho’s largest utility to comply with Idaho’s
adopted energy policy.
Other utilities across the country embracing renewables,such as Xcel Energy in Colorado that just
invested in 750 MW of new wind generation because it was the best deal going.
At the same time utilities in our region are retiring coal plants early,including the Boardman and
Centralia plants.NV Energy,co-owner of the North Valmy coal plant with Idaho Power,pledge to be
coal free by 2020,and just this month the nation’s largest utility,the Tennessee Valley Authority,
announced it will be shutting down 8 coal plants that generate 3,300 MW of capacity.
We are also here this evening to ask Idaho’s largest electric utility to lead us towards securing
energy independence and a more stable climate and livable future for our state.We recognize and
appreciate the leadership Idaho Power has shown by investments in Idaho’s energy efficiencies,but
we believe they can do more.
We understand that we cannot simply shutter Jim Bridger tomorrow or next year,but we firmly
believe that there are better alternatives than continuing to pour hundreds of millions of dollars
into Idaho Power’s aging coal fleet.Idaho Power can do better than to lock ratepayers into in coal-
fired generation for decades to come,which is essentially what Idaho Power is asking from this
Commission in this case.
In conclusion,we ask that until Idaho Power fully accounts for the long-term costs of operating the
Jim Bridger coal plant that you deny binding ratemaking treatment and protect Idaho Power
ratepayers.
Thank you for the opportunity to address our members’concerns this evening.
Sincerely,
Zack Waterman
Idaho Chapter Director
Sierra Club
November 25,2013
Idaho Public Utility Commission
P.O.Box 83720
Boise,ID 83720-0074
RE:Comments on Idaho Power’s CPCN Application,Docket #IPC-E-13-16
Dear Commissioners:
On a blue bird day there is nowhere else I’d rather be then in our great state,Idaho.
Whether drifting down one of our many wild rivers,climbing the expansive peaks of
the Sawtooth Mountains,or walking up Hulls Gulch,I have never felt as free as I do
when I am at home in the Gem State.
Yet,while Idahoans pride ourselves on freedom and local control there is one major
area of our life in which we are dependent.We are dependent in a way that is
altering our climate,and that is threatening our lifestyle,our environment,and our
health.
We are dependent on dirty coal and we pay for this addiction every month in our
utility bills.Just across state lines to our southeast,the Jim Bridger coal plant,
owned by Idaho Power,is pumping 14.7 million metric tons of C02 annually into the
atmosphere.
While the stacks from which smoke billows out of at Jim Bridger are not located in
Idaho,the responsibility for their repercussions is.When another child suffers an
asthma attack brought on by excessive fine particular matter in our atmosphere,we
the ratepayers of Idaho Power are responsible.As wild fires grow larger,and burn
hotter,a result of climate change,we the ratepayers of Idaho Power are responsible.
We are responsible because every time we turn on the lights,42%of the power that
fuels our daily lives is coming from a coal-fired power plant.Now Idaho Power is
requesting that ratepayers invest $130 million into the Jim Bridger coal plant to
install new emission-control equipment.
While I applaud Idaho Power for taking steps to comply with environmental
regulations,the continued investment in coal fired plants is bad for our health,our
environment,and in the long run our wallets.I do not believe that Idaho Power has
adequately accounted for what it will cost to keep Jim Bridger operating over the
next twenty years.It is anticipated that in June of 2014 the EPA will release new
carbon regulations for existing coal plants.What will the compliance cost to
ratepayers be then?The answer to this question is unknown.
Inside our state lines,Idaho has an abundance of unrealized clean and renewable
sources of energy.We also have un-maximized energy efficiencies that could help
—9
move us towards meeting our state’s energy needs.All this could be done while
growing our local economies.
Then Idahoans would be responsible for wealthier communities and a more diverse,
localized energy system.When a rancher saved thousands of dollars because of
energy efficiencies made in his irrigation system,we the ratepayers would be
responsible.When a family saved enough money to send their daughter to college,
based on energy savings from the solar panels on their roof,we the ratepayers
would be responsible.
This is the future that I hope to see for Idahoans.I understand that we cannot
simply close Jim Bridger tomorrow,but I do believe that ratepayer monies can be
invested much more wisely.
I respectfully request that Idaho Power account for the long-term costs of operating
the Jim Bridger coal plant and that you deny the guarantee that Idaho Power will be
able to recuperate the cost of upgrading this outdated technology.
Sincerely,
Kate Thorpe
Concerned Idaho Citizen
Development &Program Associate,Conservation Voters for Idaho
&Member of the Snake River Alliance,the Idaho Conservation League,and the
Idaho Chapter of the Sierra Club
Dick B.Miller
256 E Lake Rim Lane
Boise,Idaho 83716
208 336 1254
[e-mail]
November 25,2013
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 W Washington Street
Boise,Idaho 83702
Idaho Power’s proposed $130 million investment in selective catalytic
reduction at the Wyoming Jim Bridger coal plant has my attention.
I have been studying this matter for the past several months and appreciate
the opportunity to submit my conclusion and comments.
Further investment in Jim Bridger is bad business strategy and unfair to
ratepayers like myself.
Idaho Power should be seeking to decommission coal fired power plants like
other energy companies across the country;rather,it should be investing in
renewable,green energy alternatives and promoting energy conservation.It
makes no sense to keep investing in dirty energy technology.
Asking the Commission to allow Idaho Power to pass along the $130 million
investment to rate payers is also bad business.I object to this because Idaho
Power does not bear any risk at a time when pending environmental
compliance requirements for existing coal fired plants are uncertain.
urge ic Commssion to deny Idaho Power’s request to appru’ve $130
million for selective catalytic reduction at the Jim Bridger coal plant.
U1CK 13.Iviiller
HANDS ACROSS
THE SAND
Hands Across The Sand Is Coming To Your Beach or City
Dede Shelton —Hands Across the Sand,Director of Operations and Co
Founder.dedehandsgmaiI.com
http://www.handsacrossthesand.org
Coal is our country’s dirtiest energy source,from
mining to burning to disposing of coal waste.
In Appalachia,mining companies literally blow the tops off
mountains to reach thin seams of coal.They then dump millions of
tons of rubble and toxic waste into the streams and valleys below
the mining sites.
Burning coal releases toxic mercury that rains down into rivets and
streams.This poison then accumulates in the food chain,eventually
making its way into our bodies when we eat contaminated fish.
72 percent of all toxic water pollution in the country comes from
coal-fired power plants,making coal plants the number one source
of toxic water pollution in the U.S.
•Coal plants are quickly losing their cost competitiveness against other
energy sources.According to Lazard’s levelized cost of energy
estimates,energy efficiency,wind,solar,biomass,and combined
cycle natural gas plants can all be more economical than new coal
plants.
•The long-term prices of renewable energy sources such as wind and
solar are not tied to fuel prices,like coal,and therefore protect
utilities and ratepayers from volatility in energy fuel costs.
•Coal plants are a risky investment because future regulation of carbon
dioxide and other pollutants is currently unknown and could affect
the viability and cost-effectiveness of any investments in coal plants
in years to come.
•Idaho is prided by its world-class angling waters,including medal
streams for trout fishing.Yet,coal power is responsible for major
mercury contamination of these waters and even cause health
advisories on the fish caught within our state’s borders.
•Coal combustion releases sulfur dioxide,nitrogen oxides,particulate
matter,mercury,and carbon dioxide,all of which are pollutants,
harmful to human health.This pollution is a cause of four of the five
leading causes of death in the U.S.,including heart disease,cancer,
stroke,and chronic lower respiratory diseases.Leading health
associations,such as the American Lung Association,have stated
the need for coal plants to be retired and cleaned up.
•In addition to coal plants’air pollution,they also require vast amounts of
water to operate.We frankly don’t have water to spare without taking
it away from the citizens’needs,including agriculture and domestic
use.Wind and solar power,on the other do not need ANY water to
operate.
.
There’s plenty more information on SACE’s website at
http:/Iwww.cleanenerqy.org/Iearn/learn-about/learn-about-coal-plants/
Lived at Eielson AFB Alaska for four years,-left with respiratory
problems due to living within a mile of a coal plant that pumped
smoke and ash into the atmosphere 24/7,
Coal ash,the waste left over after coal is burned to generate power,
contains concentrated amounts of heavy metals,such as lead,
mercury,arsenic,chromium,and selenium,which are hazardous to
human health and to wildlife.
Despite this danger,coal ash is subject to less stringent rules than
everyday household garbage!Coal ash,mixed with water to form a
toxic slurry,is stored in huge impoundments,commonly called “coal
ash ponds”or “lagoons”,which often have no liners to prevent heavy
metals from getting into drinking water.The Southeast is home to
40%of the nation’s coal ash impoundments,and according to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),contains 21 of the nation’s
45 high hazard dams.
Nearly 450 impoundments across the region contain 118 billion
gallons of toxic waste —that’s enough coal ash to cover over 275,000
football fields one foot deep!These impoundments are mostly located
near major waterways,including on drinking water reservoirs,
threatening the water we rely on for drinking,agriculture,fishing and
recreation.
Lets use the 300 days of sunshine we get in this state,the constantly
blowing winds and the geothermal resources for clean energy
On November 4th this year,Denmark’s wind turbines covered 122%of the
countries demand for electricity.
“This is the highest registered figure so far,”says Preben Maegaard,director of
the Nordic Folkcenter for Renewable Energy.
A month before on October 3rd,Germany’s renewable energy peaked at 59.1%
with a combination of solar and wind.Across the entire day,36%of total
electricity generation was achieved,with solar contributing 11%at 20.5 gigawatts
at its peak.
“It was around midday on October 3,which just happened to be Germany’s
annual Reunification Day holiday,when the sun was at its fullest and the
significant peak was reached.Over the entire day,36.4%of total electricity
generation was achieved with solar and wind power;solar panels contributed
11.2%on their own.At its peak,solar accounted for 20.5 gigawaffs.
“Although the electrical grid withstood the large amount of renewable energy
flowing to it,you’ll be pleased to know that electricity prices also dived.A drop in
demand from big,conventional power plants led the electricity price index at
2:00pm to 2.75 cents per kilowatt hour.The index covers Germany,Austria,
France,and Switzerland.
RETIRING ONE DIRTY COAL-BURNING PLANT WILL
PREVENT:
more than 29 premature deaths47 heart affacksi 46 asthma
attacks22 asthma emergency room visits
The Pubic Utility Commission should not grant
“binding ratemaking treatment”to Idaho Power,which
guarantees that the company can stick ratepayers with
the full bill even if the plant shuts down earlier than
expected due to tougher pollution-control limits.
•In June 2014,EPA will release proposed limits on
greenhouse gas pollution.Idaho ratepayers should
not be put on the hook for $130 million until the costs
of complying with these new guidelines are better
understood seven months from now.
•The Public Utility Commission should put the brakes
on Idaho’s addiction to coal and pressure Idaho Power
to invest in clean,renewable energy projects located
here in Idaho.
Jean Jewell
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,November26,2013 1:45 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:[e-mail]
Subject:Case Comment Form:Greg Wonacott
Name:Greg Wonacott
Case Number:
Email:gwonacottcableone.net
Telephone:[phone]
Address:1204 N 23 rd St
Boise ID,83702
Name of Utility Company:idaho power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:It has been said that 95%is simply showing up.I suppose the Jim Bridger hearing
last night was one of those times.the only people to show are activists or lobby groups.
Few standard rate payers,probably no agricultural users,yet the Statesman article implies
the Chairperson wanted it noted that most everyone in attendance was against the investment
in cleaning up the coal fire facilities.Nothing could be further than the truth.The
reality is most Idahoans don’t take the time to go sit in a hearing room of the PUC over
their future electricity;it simply doesn’t rank on their “to do’s”.On the other hand the
activist folks organize and get vocal...certainty not a bad thing but not a true
representative sample of the average rate payer /utility customer.I am no scientist nor
activist,but I do believe that COAL has a role to play in the countries energy independence
and if it need to be made cleaner...the users should bear the cost.Cleaning up COAL is
simply not cool to these activists,they would prefer spending their or dare i say the
governments money on windmills as long as they don’t have to look at them.I do feel Idaho
Power has to demonstrate that through technology they can achieve anticipated goals on green
house gases to justify the continued operation of Jim Bridger or the plant in Nevada.
Unique Identifier:67.137.11.54
1
Jean Jewell
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,November26,2013 12:11 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:[e-mail]
Subject:Case Comment Form:Valeri Kiesig
Name:Valeri Kiesig
Case Number:IPC-E-13-16
Email:vkiesigyahoo.com
Telephone:[phone]
Address:403 Ofarrell St.
Boise Idaho,83702
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:IPCO’s request to procure “binding ratemaking treatment”in order to fund upgrades
to the Jim Bridger Power Plant should be denied.
If the future of affordable power in the state of Idaho is in peril,then that is the
consequence of already having hitched our wagon to an untenable power supply.If what the
representatives at Idaho Power are telling customers is true—time has run out!we need coal
fixes today!or our energy prices will soar!—then our resources have already been short
sightedly managed.If IPCO needs 130 million dollars to carry on with business as usual,then
that burden belongs on the backs of its shareholders.
I write as someone with a graduate degree in the history of public health and medicine (I
worked for several years as a public health epidemiologist for the city of New York).My
perspective on our relationship with energy and technological progress is grounded in the
story as it has always unfolded in America.The themes are just as described previously:
short-sightedness,hunger for profits,a drive to sustain the world as we know it with no
care for energy and environment tomorrow.I am pleased that the PUC has this opportunity to
make a new historical legacy and redirect our energy consumption before environmental
disaster makes it a necessity.
More importantly,I write as someone who is weeks away from becoming a mother.I love this
state.I hope my child will grow up with the experience of Idaho that I had,growing up in
Boise in Kuna.But I already see the impact of climate change on my surroundings.The PUC
can send a message to Idaho Power that they too are willing to embrace change if that’s what
it takes to protect the future generations of our state.
Unique Identifier:71.209.60.15
1
Jean Jewell
From:k.ultic2gmaiI.com
Sent:Tuesday,November26,2013 12:08 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:k.uItic2gmaiI.com
Subject:Case Comment Form:Katherine Ultican
Name:Katherine Ultican
Case Number:IPC-E-13-16-32912
Email:k.ultic2(gmail.com
Telephone:
Address:1018 N 7th Street
Boise Idaho,83702
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power Company Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:To Idaho Public Utilities Commissioners:
I am concerned about the quality of air and water on planet Earth and am convinced that human
effort should be concentrated on the preservation of clean air and water.To that end,as an
Idaho Power Company ratepayer I do not support funding further use of coal or other fossil
fuels in energy production that contribute to greenhouse gas concentration.I refer
commissioners to a recent article on the subject:Joh Vidal,‘Large Rise in C02 Emissions
Sounds Climate Change Alarm,”The Guardian,March 8,
2013,www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/08/hawaii-climate-change-second-greatest-annijal-
rise-emissions.
Thank you.
Unique Identifier:132.178.2.65
1
Jean Jewell
From:richardporter60gmail.com
Sent:Tuesday,November 26,2013 12:00 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewel!;Gene Fadness
Cc:richardporter60gmail.com
Subject:Case Comment Form:Richard Porter
Name:Richard Porter
Case Number:
Email:richardporter60(gmail.com
Telephone:[phone]
Address:6285 W Battlement Ct
Boise ID,Idaho
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:Idaho PUC,
I am commenting on the SCR controls on Jim Bridger units 3 and 4.I worked
in the construction industry for over 40 years in two different crafts,Boilermakers and
Sheet Metal workers.I understand the problems with the pollution that coal fired power
plants create and have seen how it effects the environment.
I was born in Idaho but spent most of my time working in Washington and Oregon.I have
supported alternative energy for years for the future of generations ahead.
I am aware of the latest technology in nuclear,wind,solar,and Idaho’s untapped power
source under ground.Why are we thinking about staying in the dark ages when we have the
chance to move into the future.The generations ahead deserve better.Jim Bridger is only a
fix for now but may cost the tate payers dearly later.Please look for the future instead of
the past.The rate
payers deserve better.This isn’t about share holders profits.Thank you,Richard
Porter
Unique Identifier:67.60.2.241
Jean Jewell
From:deeachildersgmail.com
Sent:Tuesday,November26,2013 11:51 AM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:deeachildersgmafl.com
Subject:Case Comment Form:Dee Ann Childers
Name:Dee Ann Childers
Case Number:IPC-E-13-16
Email:deeachildersgmail.corn
Telephone:[phone]
Address:9505 W River Beach Lane
Garden City ID,83714
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:I urge the Idaho Public Utility Commission to deny the certificate of convenience
and necessity and the binding ratemaking treatment that Idaho Power has proposed.The
$130,000,000 band-aid for pollution controls is only the beginning of risky investments that
Idaho Power will have to make at Jim Bridger.The denial of Idaho Power’s request will cause
management at the Utility to bring to the PUC the total cost package anticipated to keep JIm
Bridger operating over the long-term.Lisa Grow,Idaho Power’s senior vice president of
power supply,in her Readers View article in the Idaho Statesmen (November23,2013),is
correct that:“As I testified before the commission earlier this month,Idaho Power needs a
glide path to carry us beyond coal ...“(emphasis added)Agreed.However the if we follow
Idaho Power’s glide path,the rate payers will have to pay for the Jim Bridger complex 2 to 3
times over its initial cost and we,the rate payers,will still be struck with a stranded
asset.Coal is a risky investment and the PUC should not permit Idaho Power to put its rate
payers at risk.Please include in your order in IPC-E-13-16,that Idaho Power provide the
PUC a true and accurate picture of the costs of operating Bridger in the long-term and a
truthful,meaningful analysis of alternatives rather than the dismissive case that Idaho
Power now gives sustainable alternatives.
Thank You!
Unique Identifier:67.60.189.111
1
Jean Jewell
From:rsandberg36gmail.com
Sent:Tuesday,November26,2013 11:14AM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:rsandberg36gmail.com
Subject:Case Comment Form:Robert Sandberg
Name:Robert Sandberg
Case Number:IPC-E-13-16
Email:rsanUberg36(lgmail.com
Telephone:
Address:918 Haines Street
Boise Idaho,$3712
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:Please reject Idaho Power’s application to upgrade the Jim Bridger coal-fired power
plant and charge its customers for the upgrade,while paying out to its shareholders.As a
Project Management Professional,I find this plan unworthy of implementing.
I have read through the current IRP and I attended Idaho Power’s public meeting introducing
the IRP in Boise.
In my comments given verbally to the PUC in their hearing on November 25th,I drew the
analogy of a compass,with all four points of the compass important to be considered in any
project.It is called the Compass of Sustainability.North is Nature;South is Society;
East is Economics;West is Well-Being.All four must be in balance.Here is my evaluation:
Nature (North)Coal-fired power plants are the single biggest source of C02 emissions.
2,000 pounds of C02 are emitted for each MWh of electricity a coal-fired power plant
produces.In the following table,I note the output of each plant that Idaho Power
published,and show the daily C02 output:
Name of Coal-Fired Power Plant MW production C02 Output in One Day
Jim Bridger 771 MW3,708,000 lbs.
North Valmy 284 MW1,363,200 lbs.
Boardman 64 MW 30,720 lbs.
Climate change is a fact.The high content of C02 in our atmosphere is causing the poles to
thaw,seawater to rise,droughts and unusually violent weather events.
As a project manager,my job is to manage the expectations and to be sensitive to all
stakeholders in a project,not just the ratepayers,the shareholders and the corporation and
regulators.The animals and the expanse of nature are stakeholders in this project,as well
as the unborn generations to come.This proposal from Idaho Power is harmful to Nature.
In 1994 Idaho Power embraced PV solar,and their CEO at the time signed off on the
initiative.They installed solar panels on their roof.Idaho Power seems to have since
forgotten what they once espoused and practiced.Their former direction was much more
beneficial to nature.
Society (South)Remote locations of coal-fired power plants in Wyoming or Oregon still
affect us all.The Earth’s atmosphere is but a thin layer surrounding the entire surface,
and what is spewed into one region travels all around it.The greenhouse effect caused by
1
elevated levels of C02 is deleterious to society,causing the displacement of populations
along the coasts,drying out cropland and increasing the combustible state of forests and
grasslands.Such a decision has harmful effects to society.
Economics (East)There are hidden costs to carbon.The EPA will demand added upgrades,the
adverse effects on human health and increased disease,and the Carbon Tax all add to what has
been touted as a “cheap”source of power.It is anything but cheap.As for Carbon Tax,here
is what the George W.Bush Institute stated on June 27,2013:
“Still,it would be worth it because,ultimately,using a carbon tax rather than a welter of
command-and-control regulations dictated by the EPA would result in a much more market-
friendly outcome.If done correctly it might also have the ancillary benefit of providing a
boost for tax reform,which is currently standing on weak legs.A carbon tax could be used to
reduce the corporate income tax,taxes on dividends or capital gains,or any other tax more
pernicious to economic growth than one on carbon —which includes nearly all of the ones
currently in place.
But it is time for Republicans to realize that the war over climate change is over,sue for
peace,and get the best terms possible.”
Well-Being (West)The well-being of individuals is also adversely affected by this project.
The continued upgrade and use of coal-fired power plants and their contribution of C02 to the
atmosphere harms our very quality of life that we in Idaho so cherish.Health problems,lack
of snow in the winter (which will be another consequence that Idaho Power should consider)
and dry conditions affect the very fabric of our lives.
A sustainable project must be balanced by these four points of the compass.Such a request
from Idaho Power is untenable.I strongly urge the PUC to reject Idaho Power’s application
to upgrade the Jim Bridger Plant.
Robert Sandberg
Unique Identifier:67.60.248.203
2
Jean Jewell
From:kathlgIasshotmail.com
Sent:Tuesday,November26,2013 10:30AM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:kathlglasshotmail.com
Subject:Case Comment Form:Kathleen Whitacre
Name:Kathleen Whitacre
Case Number:IPC-E-13-16
Email:kathlglass(hotmail.com
Telephone:[phone]
Address:5567 W Clearview Ct
Boise ID,83703
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:My comment on the Jim Bridger Coal Plant:
I was born between coal strip pits in southern Illinois,and have also spent 1 1/2 years
under the plume of the Four Corners coal burning power plants.So I am familiar with coal up
close.[clean coal is an OXYMORON]
NO MORE COAL,LOTS MORE CONSERVATION is my conclusion.
When the rains finally came in the blistering late summer at the Four Corners (Mesa Verde
National Park),instead of running around for joy in the rain drops I had to take shelter
from the concentrated mercury bath falling from the sky.
I do not wish to be forced to pay for an antiquated,foul,unethical and economically unsound
energy source just so I can have a reading light at night.I wish my money to be funding to
forward looking methods such as conservation and not just lining the pockets of Idaho Power
management and investors.
Several nations in Europe have proved solar power to be an economically viable energy source.
It is high time for Idaho to move forward instead of clinging to the past.I am so tired of
watching Idaho BRING UP THE REAR.Why not force Idaho Power to be LEADERS in the energy
field instead of backing butt first into the future??????
Idaho Power management wants to make us ratepayers pay for this coal insanity because they
have totally failed to develop sound Earth friendly energy sources such as solar and
conservation.For 22 years I have watched them FAIL TO PURSUE ENERGY CONSERVATION as a
“source.Perhaps the PUC is partly to blame for failing to REQUIRE MORE of Idaho Power.
IT IS LONG PAST TIME FOR CHANGE.Getting OFF COAL is step one.
Sincerely yours,
Kathleen Whitacre
PS.Yes,I do have all flouresent light bulbs,have unscrewed 6 of 8 bathroom-fixture bulbs,
use no air conditioning,but NEED HELP with keeping the venison frozenl Where are the PUC and
Idaho Power with on the ground real solutions????
Unique Identifier:174.27.52.153
1
Jean Jewell
From:/teamtarekq.com
Sent:Tuesday,November 26,2013 10:16AM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:/teamtarekq.com
Subject:Case Comment Form:Ann Finley
Name:Ann Finley
Case Number:IPC-E-13-16
Email:/teamtarek(g.com
Telephone:[phone]
Address:3983 Oak Park P1
Boise Idaho,83703
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:As a ratepayer I do not believe Idaho Power should be allowed to charge its
customers $130 million to keep its coal plants running.I am concerned about the negative
effects on human health that have been documented throughout the world among young and old
folks in impoverished populations where coal is burned for heating and cooking.I’m concerned
about global warming.I’m concerned for the environment and the wild critters that depend on
humankind to save their home.Please tell Idaho Power NO.We’re driving this planet without a
spare.
Unique Identifier:65.129.43.151
1
Jean Jewell
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,November 26,2013 3:04 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewel!;Gene Fadness
Cc:[e-mail]
Subject:Case Comment Form:Dee Ann Childers
Name:Dee Ann Childers
Case Number:IPC-E-13-16
Email:Deeachildersgmail.com
Telephone:[phone]
Address:9505 W River Beach Ln
Garden City ID,$3714
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:In a recent article in High Country New entitled “Power Play:Idaho Power,one of
the West’s old school monopolies,is waging war on renewable energy.Is it winning?”
(September 2,2013),it notes that:the Jim Bridger coal-fired plant:
stores the wastewater and sludge from burning coal in open unlined ponds.EPA is
considering stiffer regulations for those ponds,even labeling them ‘toxic.’Should that
happen,Idaho Power and the plant’s co-owners would have to treat nearly 50 years (emphasis
added)of slurry as hazardous waste,and the cost could shut the plant down.”
I urge the Idaho Public Utility Commission to deny the certificate of convenience and
necessity and the binding ratemaking treatment that Idaho Power has proposed.The
$130,000,000 band-aid for pollution controls is only the beginning of risky investments that
Idaho Power will have to make at Jim Bridger.The denial of Idaho Power’s request will cause
management at the Utility to bring to the PUC the total cost package anticipated to keep JIm
Bridger operating over the long-term.Lisa Grow,Idaho Power’s senior vice president of
power supply,in her Readers View article in the Idaho Statesmen (November23,2013),is
correct that:“As I testified before the commission earlier this month,Idaho Power needs a
glide path to carry us beyond coal ...“(emphasis added)Agreed.However the if we follow
Idaho Power’s glide path,the rate payers will have to pay for the Jim Bridger complex 2 to 3
times over its initial cost and we,the rate payers,will still be struck with a stranded
asset.Coal is a risky investment and the PUC should not permit Idaho Power to put its rate
payers at risk.Please include in your order in IPC-E-l3-16,that Idaho Power provide the
PUC a true and accurate picture of the costs of operating Bridger in the long-term and a
truthful,meaningful analysis of alternatives rather than the dismissive case that Idaho
Power now gives sustainable alternatives.
Thank you for this opportunity to present my views.
Unique Identifier:70.208.1.134
1
Jean Jewell
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Tuesday,November 26,2013 3:21 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Jean Jewell;Gene Fadness
Cc:[e-mail]
Subject:Case Comment Form:SE Slye
Name:SE Slye
Case Number:IPC-E-13-16
Email:slyeidaho(cableone.net
Telephone:
Address:5619 Lubkin St
Boise ID,83706
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Acknowledge public record:True
Comment:I acknowledge that my comments are available for public and media inspection and
hopefully reviewed by the utility.
The public strong support against Idaho Power’s plan to increase the use of coal for energy
was shown at the PUC 11/26/13 hearing.
After all was said against the not so clean coal firing plants,I would hope that the PUC
questions Idaho Power’s plan to charge ratepayers $130 million to keep the older coal plants
in Wyoming running.
I think the PUC can help Idaho Power find a better solution.One solution comes up every
morning.Idaho Power should be investing in Idaho’s renewable energy future and energy
efficiency.
Thank you.
Unique Identifier:67.132.125.82
1