20170807Comments (2).PDF

Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Sunday,August 6,2017 3:20 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Steve Smith
Name:Steve Smith
Case Number:‘‘17-
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:[phone]
Address:10286 E.Red Rock Rd.
Swanlake Idaho,83281
Name of Utility Company:None
Comment:Idaho Power’s Opinion about fairness needs a little straightening out.The comment that Net Metering
customers receive a full retail credit on their bill for energy they send to the grid should say they receive a full retail
credit on their bill for energy they use up at a set later time but any extra power they produce over that amount is not
given full retail credit.The Point was brought out in an Idaho State Journal op-ed that it cost Idaho Power $65/month to
provide service to each customer.Other than Net Metering customers there are other customers that do not pay the
$65 /month What about all the customers who don’t have at least a $60 power bill?
What about those customers that paid attention to all the ads that the power company put out telling one how to cut
their power bills by conserving power and by buying energy efficient lights and appliances?Should they have to pay the
$60?How about those customers that by themselves,or got help,added insulation and energy efficient windows to cut
their power bills?Should they have to pay the $60?How about those customers that never had nor don’t plan on using
$60 worth of Power?Should they have to pay the $60?
Now that same Power Company is trying to tell us that it cost them $60 regardless of how much power a customer uses
to maintain the power grid and bill them every month.Will those same customers get billed that $60 next time the
Power Company needs money?Will there be a minimum Power bill for every one?Why not reward those that use less
power?
When the state and federal Governments spent all that money and time trying to educate the public on saving energy
then passed the PURPA law of 1979 some people went out and purchased renewable energy systems with the promise
of Net Metering and the idea that maybe this would pencil out and help the environment at the same time.
Now costs are coming down and it does indeed pencil out,so more and more folks are installing Renewable energy
systems.Some Public Utilities,and I emphasize this,are working with their customers to develop strategies to utilize this
new Power with smart technologies that recognize the low power factor to their advantage as well as being able to hold
off purchasing new infrastructure.Other Public Utilities are fighting with all their might to stop any new resource that
they don’t have power over.Remember these are Public Utilities that are guaranteed a profit,as well as,their own areas
of operation that no competition can disrupt.That is called a Monopoly.These companies are given these favorable
conditions in exchange for doing what is best for the Public good.Is it in the Public interest to reduce new power plants
and new power lines?How about the environmental issues with air and water?
While it can be a hard pill to swallow after having your own way for 100+years “the penetration of renewables and
energy efficiency on the U.S.power grid is energizing utilities,regulators,and energy companies to re-evaluate how they
do business.”Perhaps it is time for this practice in Socialism to be reconsidered for the public good and deregulate the
Power companies like the Airlines,the Telephone companies,Railroads and the Buss Companies.
If this commission agrees with the Power Company and accepts a new rate structure for net Metered customers I would
like to suggest some points to be considered.
1.All customers not meeting there minimum cost of service should have a rate structure different from the
standard-service rates.Not just Net Metered customers.
1
2.Tier rates for Power usage should be developed in Idaho,such as California and other states,to reward not fine,
small users of power and charge the heavy residential users that add more infrastructure costs.
3.Smart Inverters should be required as long as the power company learns how to use them to help in their power
distribution scenarios.
4.Net metered customers can not only help with peak loads but can utilize Battery storage on site to help balance
out power surges.New inverters today have this function;in fact most of the new products have the AC/DC capabilities.
If Net Metered customers must pay the $60 fee then how about a way for them to make that up with say providing
power during peak times at an enhanced rate.This can be done with today’s inverters and Storage.Also,allowing the
power companies to draw from that storage at any time they need extra power.This is what smart inverters can do.
Unique Identifier:66.160.248.20
2
Diane Holt
From:[e-mail]
Sent:Sunday,August 6,2017 5:51 PM
To:Beverly Barker;Diane Holt;Matthew Evans
Subject:Case Comment Form:Beth Landis
Name:Beth Landis
Case Number:PFi7—!3
Email:[e-mail]
Telephone:
Address:
Eagle ID,83616
Name of Utility Company:Idaho Power
Comment:I am submitting a comment about net metering and increasing the charges.The information sent to us was
not correct when it said that net metering is supplemented by others that pay higher costs.The Brookings Institute
report states it differently.Also,please,please,look at power generation with a big perspective,Think outside the box.
Think about the future.Vision a new future for our children and grandchildren,to 7 generations.Look at states and
countries that are making different choices.Think about sustainability.Thank you
Unique Identifier:63.155.19.245
1