20220729Comments(5)_5.pdf

From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Friday, July 29, 2022 7:00:11 AM
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: John Ottenhoff
Submission Time: Jul 28 2022 5:23PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 18226 Southlake Circle
Caldwell, ID 83607
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "Just days after having solar panels installed on my home, I received from Idaho Power a summary of their recent Value of Distributed Energy Resources study. It seems
obvious to most observers that this is a seriously flawed study that serves to seriously diminish the viability of solar power in Idaho at a time when it is most crucial--in the midst of serious
climate change emergencies--to encourage it. The study underestimates several avoided costs of customer-owned solar including avoided generation capacity and avoided transmission and
distribution costs. And it fails to account for the avoided environmental costs of installing more customer-generated solar. I urge the Commission to reject this study and Idaho Power's
intention to seriously undermine solar power in Idaho. "
------
Name: Pat AartiSubmission Time: Jul 28 2022 8:23PM
Email: [e-mail]: 208-985-3424
Address: 708 Fir Mccall, ID 83638
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "I put solar panels on my house. It cost me $40,000. I live on a fixed income and
end up paying Idaho Power 4to5 months out of the year. The study is terrible flawed and should be redone. I’m willing to do my part, but think the study is being misused. "
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Friday, July 29, 2022 12:00:06 PM
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Blair Baldwin
Submission Time: Jul 29 2022 11:32AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 302 Overlook Avenue Box 972
Cascade, ID 83611
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "Idaho Power has undervalued the avoided costs of customer-owned solar.Proposing a figure that is between 34 and 40 percent lower than the current cost of electricity
is a disincentive to consumers to invest in solar thereby decelerating movement toward Idaho'sstated clean enery goals. They have also failed to account for the environmental/economic
benefits of customer generated solar. As of July 11, 2022 'there have been 9 weather/climatedisaster events with losses exceeding $1 Billion each to effect the U.S.' (www.ncei.noaa.gov).
Does Idaho Power believe there is some magic dome over the state that will exempt Idahofrom these events? Please consider denying Idaho Power's current cost of solar study so the
utility can come up with a more 'fair and credible' study as previously ordered. Failure to do sowill be a failure of the PUC, Idaho Power and our commitment to environmental goals that
save dollars and make sense."
------
Name: Anthony AppelhansSubmission Time: Jul 29 2022 11:52AM
Email: [e-mail]: 208-524-0383
Address: 6643 S LIMOUSIN AVEIdaho Falls, ID 83404
Name of Utility Company: Rocky Mountain Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "My opinion is that the VODER study by Rocky Mountain Power underestimates
several avoided costs of customer-owned solar including avoided generation capacity andavoided transmission and distribution costs. The study fails to account for the avoided
environmental costs of installing more customer generated solar, These need to be addressedbefore any change in the rate structure is considered by the PUC. "
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Friday, July 29, 2022 2:00:05 PM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Arthur Pratt
Submission Time: Jul 29 2022 1:16PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 147 Ellsworth Rd
Pocatello, ID 83202
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "I encourage you to reject Idaho Power's 2022 VODER study due to the following reasons: 1) Idaho Power has a conflict of interest with the study because they have no financial
interest to allow distributed generation, as this competes with their bottom line of selling energy. The study should have been conducted by a neutral, third-party. 2) The study
underestimates the avoided cost of customer owned solar by undervaluing the avoided generation capacity and transmission/distribution losses. 3) The study neglects the avoided
environmental and social costs associated with distributed generation. As the recent years have shown, climate change is real and we are feeling the effects of it both in our pocket books
(e.g., energy bills due to increased need for air conditioning) and in our health (e.g., increased wildfires, drought, etc.). While these costs are hard for the layman to monetize, there are
companies that are specialized in doing so. Rather than completely ignored, avoided environmental costs should have value. "
------