20220714Comments(9)_9.pdf

From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Thursday, July 14, 2022 7:00:12 AM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Timothy Riha
Submission Time: Jul 13 2022 5:13PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 2459 Succor Creek Rd
Homedale, ID 83628
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power Company
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "I have read through this entire study. It appears to me that Idaho Power is wanting to take the profits from independently produced power from my current residential solar
system and take away the solar, clean energy producing system that we have installed on our residence. I believe that if any changes are made, that anyone with a solar energy producing
system currently installed, be "grandfathered," in at what the rules were at the time of install. We had this system installed based on the current values, not what Idaho Power would like
them to be in the future. Please do not change the rules in the middle of the game. Our solar system has only been in place since February 2022. It was supposed to be installed by October
2021 and though not our fault, it didn't get done until Feb. I don't feel that changes are needed, but if changes are made to how Idaho Power bills/uses/takes advantage of, our energy
production, it should be based on the rules in play at the time. So, if you decide to make changes, make it from here on out, not retroactive to an arbitrary date. It might have changed
our decision to add solar to our house and try to contribute to a more clean energy future. Sincerely, Timothy A. Riha"
------
From:Dax Mickelson
To:Jan Noriyuki; Jan Noriyuki; [e-mail]
Subject:Comments relating IPC-E-22-22 and IPC-E-21-21
Date:Thursday, July 14, 2022 8:37:05 AM
First, thank you for providing notice to allow public comments on the issue of exchange of power generation
between Idaho Power and on-site by Idaho citizens. This, and topics near to, have been on my mind a lot lately.
I love the ability to be able to generate power, especially during peak demand times of high heat (when A/C
units are running). I feel I'm contributing in assisting my fellow citizens by "loaning" to them my excess power
generation. I then "borrow back" that excess when the sun isn't shining; which also happens to be during low
demand times. I view my "net metering" relationship with Idaho Power as a win/win scenario. They don't have
to have some gas/coal-powered power plant "on the ready" for load demands during peak times and I don't have
to have expensive batteries on-site to store my excess production. We both are beneficiaries of the relationship.
For this co-beneficial service I can see why Idaho Power sees it as
"unfair" that the exchange is 1:1. They view their "under normal circumstances" power generation creation costs
and compare that to the power we provide to them. I think a better comparison would be to compare their
"emergency" or "peak demand" power generation costs to what we provide them. I don't have the numbers to
make this comparison and the report doesn't seem to acknowledge Idaho Power's different generation costs based
on which generators are being use so I cannot give you an exact equivalency.
This said, I can see why the recommendation to move to "net billing" as it looks like it would better identify the
differences in the costs of
power throughout the day instead of just rolling the meter "forwards and backwards" whenever. Measuring the
inflow and outflow separately (and in hourly increments) makes sense to me. However, I don't see how this
results in a "net loss" (or rather, a larger bill) for those of us who
are generating power during "high load" times and pulling power during "low load" times but, as I read it, that is
what the graphs and comparisons are showing. Thus, I must conclude that Idaho Power is no longer doing 1:1
(whether that be KWH or Dollars) exchange but some fractional exchange. The examples and descriptions don't
seem to simplify or detail this fractional exchange rate though.
A little off topic:
I worry though that Idaho Power's/IPUC's forecasting is based on past events. Between the combination of so
many new Idaho residents and the transition of our transportation going to batter powered vehicles I
worry that they might not be ready for the demand forthcoming. I believe we should be massively re-
engineering our power grid to handle this huge new load and encourage a more distributed, vs centralized, power
generation system. We should be massively encouraging citizens and companies to generate ever more power.
Not that I think it will happen but what if Idaho became a net exporter of power to other places on the national
grid!
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Thursday, July 14, 2022 2:00:06 PM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: James Marconi
Submission Time: Jul 14 2022 1:51PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 3040 E Bonview Dr
Boise, ID 83712
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "The purpose of these comments is to speak against Idaho Power’s proposed rate change for home solar generation as outlined in its VODER Study. Our motivation for
installing a rooftop solar system included: • helping to reduce the need for Idaho power to build additional power plants, • reducing the cost of energy for our home, • providing
uninterrupted power during grid outages, • providing power for a future electric vehicle or other electric appliances, and • ultimately to reduce dependence on fossil fuels for our
grandchildren. The study suggests financial compensation vs. kWh compensation and values Idaho power at about 8-10 cents/kWh and that generated by a homeowner at 2-4 cents per
kWh. We feel this to be completely inadequate. Based on the system installed in our home in October 2021, we can expect to generate 7500 kWh/year or 187,500 kWh over its estimated
25 year life. This works out to over 9 cents per kWh to cover the cost of installation of the hardware for generation. We never expected solar generation to be a financial bonus for us,
but under the proposed rate change, it now becomes a financial burden from which we cannot escape. As a net solar customer, I am providing electricity during some of the most profitable
parts of the day locally. Our system offsets things like distance and conversion losses that are part of the traditional grid system. As part of this co-generation cooperation, I feel it is very
fair to maintain a non-refundable kwh credit on a monthly basis with a carry forward to offset my residential energy use. This, by the way, is the “deal” that “legacy” systems enjoy, and
they comprise 80% of home solar generators. Idaho Power should continue to advocate for more clean energy production by customers. Using the distributed generators means the utility
doesn’t have to build expensive new power plants and can avoid other costs, thereby keeping utility rates lower for all customers."
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Thursday, July 14, 2022 3:00:09 PM
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: JoLynn Aquino
Submission Time: Jul 14 2022 2:04PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 12185 Swainsons Lane
Nampa, ID 83686
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "We, a solar generator, at our residence am making a statement that the panel needs to take in consideration of the climate here in Idaho. Our system was approved by Idaho
Power in the early part of 2021, the system is larger than what was stated in the letter that I received on July 13,2022. Reason for this was due to our monthly usage during the summer
and early fall months due to high daily temperatures. So durning spring and early summer I do generate more than needed due to the hours of sunlight which can reach up to 14 hours daily.
The extra DOES assist us during the late fall and winter months and maybe into early spring, as evidence of this spring 2022. For I don’t make enough to cover my daily usage due to
weather and the daily hours of sunlight. There are many factors that effect the amount of electricity that we generate. The weather, cloud cover and hazy, affects the productivity of the
solar panels. So we greatly appreciate the 1 to 1 ratio, and no penalties for making more than we use during the above mentioned months. We also don’t have an issue in paying for the line
usage, that at the moments is the same for all Idaho Power clients. Or paying the normal amount for the amount that I do draw from the grid on those unfortunate days that I don’t
make enough to cover my daily usage. We would not appreciate it if this is to change to the point that we are paying more than those that don’t generate any electricity. We are attempting
to assist in where we can with Idaho’s goal of becoming a clean electricity state. But don’t feel like we should be penalized or short changed because of our decision to go solar. We
understand that some are unable to go solar but we to could of been in that situation if we hadn’t gone solar when we did. As our world is changing there will be more and more pull on
the electricity grid as more things are using that form of power. As it is we may have to increase our system to over compensate this type of increase, also. Thank you for reading our
concerns, please take this information into consideration when you deal with the results of the above case study # IPC-E-22-22. Idaho Power Client JoLynn Aquino. "
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Thursday, July 14, 2022 4:00:05 PM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Timothy E Riha
Submission Time: Jul 14 2022 3:43PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 3419 Kaden Lane
Nampa , ID 83686
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "Gentleman, let me start out by saying that I am an Idaho Power Stock holder. It was my understanding that generation compensation was settled at 1 to 1 kWh usage offset.
2019 and 2020 Now it seems Idaho Powers greed once again is showing as they try to restructure the rules of the settlement to fit their needs. (2019 and 2020) why not allow new
on-site generation to continue at 1 to 1 until a new ruling is settled. It seems ironic that Idaho Power is conducting a new study. That is comparable to allowing a fox to count your chickens
in the hen house each night. Why wasn’t an independent third party allowed to come in and conduct the study? I realize that as a legacy system I draw power from the grid at night, but
put in more than I use during the day. If Idaho power sells electricity to other entities, what is the rate of compensation they receive? This was not explained in the study. Also, with all the
new construction of office buildings, individual homes, business parks, apartment buildings, and condominiums, one would think Idaho Power would welcome the extra power from on-
site generation, so we do not end up with blackouts experienced in other parts of this country. Residential customers who recently installed on-site generation, may have had second
thoughts about their investment, if they knew Idaho Power was going to try to pull fast one by changing the agreement made in 2019 and 2020. I totally believe in free enterprise, but I do
not believe in taking your ball and going home, when you do not like the way the game is being played. As and Idaho power stock holder I am all for making money but not at the
expense of others. Idaho Power is being just plain greedy. They forgot the “Public” part of being a public utility."
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Thursday, July 14, 2022 11:00:06 AM
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Melissa Waylan
Submission Time: Jul 14 2022 10:03AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 4121 N Creswell Way
Boise, ID 83713
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "To Whom it May Concern, I am writing to express my concern about IdahoPower's ongoing attempt to pay solar generators less for the power they receive than they
charge us for the same amount of power. They claim it's to recoup maintenance and systempurchase costs but they did not pay for, nor do they maintain, the solar system on our roof. We
do. If anything, we are paying for maintenance and hardware they benefit from. Consideringthe same watt of power to be worth a different amount of money based on who's buying it is
deceptive and unethical. Especially at the drastically low price they want to pay for power theywill then turn around and sell at a profit. Solar generating customers are paying out of their
own pockets to build renewable energy infrastructure and reduce pollution in the TreasureValley. We should be rewarded not penalized. Additionally, this is Idaho Power's third attempt
to get this passed by the IPUC. How many times are we going to waste taxpayer money tellingthem no? Please tell Idaho Power, once again, that they have to pay the full value for what
they purchase, just as they expect their customers to pay them. Thank you for your time,Melissa Waylan "
------
Name: THOMAS ANDREWS
Submission Time: Jul 14 2022 10:00AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 209 North Hiawatha Drive
Hailey, ID 83333
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "On page three of the study Idaho Power seems to think that additional generationduring the day is a problem. This is precisely when the demand on the grid is the greatest and
excess power from on-site customers can supplement the commercial and industrial need ofthe grid. Idaho Power complains in their study that 65% of their retail cost is in operations and
maintenance. Is this not an argument for someone else to own the power generation equipment at no cost to them? Idaho Power failed to address environmental impacts and societal benefits
in this study. Many other study's have been able to quantify these benefits and Idaho Power should be required to as well. The ECR should not be reduced from its current level and I
would like to see it increase over the coming years. "
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Thursday, July 14, 2022 1:00:06 PM
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Jeffrey FillmoreSubmission Time: Jul 14 2022 12:54PMEmail: [e-mail]: 208-407-3207Address: 8655 W Canterbury StBoise, ID 83704
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "With more homeowners, like myself, using solar to offset/remove our electrical costs they are trying to clawback lost profits. Idaho Power wishes to only pay "Market Rate" for exported solar but homeowner are not part of the "Market". We can only sell to Idaho Power. We can't shop around our exported power to other providers. This commission was designed to protect the consumer from Idaho Power's monopoly. Currently any power that I export is sold to another customer at retail price. So if Idaho Power only pays "Market Rate" they are getting a 50% or greater profit margin off of power they didn't create. This commission controls the margins that Idaho Power is able to generate. Those same margins should be applied here. Idaho Power has to pay full price for export electricity minus margin. "Market Rate" only applies to free and fair markets not power monopolies. Idaho power is once again using it monopoly to try to maximize profits."
------
Name: Carl ReedSubmission Time: Jul 14 2022 12:51PMEmail: [e-mail]: 530-710-4976Address: 3680 Sand Hollow RdNew Plymouth, ID 83655
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "Comment: As is typical, the original agreement between solar power residential and the power companies, is planning to be modified. It will decrease the credit amount the residents can expect to receive back from Idaho Power. After putting out THOUSANDS of dollars to install solar, taking into consideration the cost benefit to our family (according to the original agreement), we will take a lower credit back and the power company will receive more. Typical big business in your face scam hiding behind the "shareholders concerns". Like you didn't know before entering into the original agreement. We strongly object to anychanges in the original payment and credit structure."