20221024Comments(4)_4.pdf

From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 7:00:09 AM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Rachael Berman
Submission Time: Oct 21 2022 5:01PMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 460 E Schmeizer Lane
Boise, ID 83706
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "1) I don't trust Idaho Power's numbers. See the other study mentioned in many of the comments. 2) The "we warned you that you won't be grandfathered" thing is ridiculous.
We installed a system when our house was built in 2020. Were we supposed to wait years while all of this played out in the courts before we did our part to protect the environment?
Our billing structure should remain intact. 3) The current billing structure allows for solar systems to barely break even during their expected operable lifetime. Increasing the monthly
bills will force people to install solar only at a loss. 4) Idaho Power's goal is "100% clean energy by 2045". Until they reach said goal - there should be no disincentive to solar systems
that are, effectively, doing their job for them. 5) My current system is the 4th one I've installed in a house that I own. They are always expensive and barely amortize. I do it because I believe
in reducing pollution. Whether or not you "believe" in global warming - surely we all agree that pollution is bad? 6) If I'm ever able to get an electric car, I will need to double the amount
of panels on my roof. I want to be able to do that. If this bill or future versions of it pass - I will not only lose money on my current system, but won't be able to upgrade it to generate
enough power for a car. If Idaho Power is allowed, with this petition or any future petition, to significantly increase the utility charges for homes with solar, the PUC and the power
company might as well say "No Solar in Idaho - unless you're so rich that you can pay for your system AND pay normal utility bills". Please don't let this happen. I have pretty low energy
bills no matter what, so it's never been about the money for me. I don't have solar because it saves me money, because it never has. Like I said - it barely amortizes over the expected
lifetime of the system. I do it to protect the environment, and I'd like to be able to continue to do that. "
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Sunday, October 23, 2022 11:00:12 AM
The following comment was submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: Paul Cooperrider
Submission Time: Oct 23 2022 10:54AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: 8690 W. Atwater Dr.
Garden City, ID 83714
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "In light of further developments and publication of the Crossborder study, I wish to augment my comments to the PUC regarding IPC-E-22-22. The Idaho PUC's responsibility
to the state's energy customer is to ensure reliable, economical and safe delivery of energy to those customers. I request that the PUC consider these points below as it deliberates on the
process and pricing values assigned to DER's. 1) We should recognize that while Idaho Power serves many electricity customers in the state, it is a business that must generate a profit and a
return to its shareholders. Its business model is based on its returns from the investment into capital projects, including energy generation. To the extent that DER's may reduce the net
potential of future capital projects, they may be perceived as a threat to Idaho Power's ability to generate that ROI. It is thus logical to conclude that Idaho Power may bias its studies to
reinforce its business model, even if there is potential detriment of the energy customer. It is the PUC's responsibility to ensure that those biases do not interfere with its rulings that affect
the energy customers in the state. The PUC should scrutinize the Idaho Power VODER study and take third party studies into account to strike the proper balance in assigning value to
DER's. 2) There are various mechanisms to assign value to the contributions of DER's. Idaho Power has proposed one set of values. There are other studies that assign higher values to A)
Avoided Energy Costs, B) Avoided Generation Capacity, C) T&D Deferral, and D) Avoided Line Losses. DER's connecting to the T&D system built out by Idaho Power should pay their
fair share to do so, but the contributions they make to providing safe, reliable and economical energy to the state's customers should not be undervalued. 3) Fossil fuels supply shocks are
probably not going to disappear in the future. Having non-fossil fuel DER's that can be called upon to provide energy in response to energy demands is a significant way to hedge against
such price shocks from market disruptions in fossil fuels. The ability to provide dispatchable energy to customers at a cost less than prevailing wholesale prices at that moment can be
further augmented if energy storage in properly valued. This hedging should be an important element in VODER. You consideration of these points is greatly appreciated. Respectfully,
Paul Cooperrider"
------
From:PUCWeb Notification
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:Notice: A comment was submitted to PUCWeb
Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 9:00:12 AM
The following comments were submitted via PUCWeb:
Name: kay van hees
Submission Time: Oct 24 2022 8:06AMEmail: [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]Address: po box 3094
Hailey, ID 83333
Name of Utility Company: Idaho Power
Case ID: IPC-E-22-22
Comment: "Idaho Power is a monopoly in Idaho. A dictatorship. A liar. Greed is the goal. Why be yet another company that is trying to kill off Mother Nature instead of promoting
anything that helps the future of human beings and other living things survive? We need solar power and promoting it in all ways we can. Idaho Power needs to pay a fair credit rate on roof
top solar instead of playing this shell game. "
------
From:Paul Hancock ([e-mail]) Sent You a Personal Message
To:Jan Noriyuki
Subject:IPC-E-22-22 Public Comment
Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 3:50:23 PM
CAUTION: This email originated outside the State of Idaho network. Verify links and attachments BEFORE you
click or open, even if you recognize and/or trust the sender. Contact your agency service desk with any concerns.
Dear Idaho Public Utilities Commission,
You guys should not change the reimbursement rate for solar home owners. Your business is guaranteed a profit. A
homeowner must invest a lot of money and it will take over 10 years to recuperate that investment. Owning solar
encourages homeowner to reduce the use of fossil fuels. It also puts them in position to charge a EV or PHEV at
home. An annual hook up fee is fair as long as it is reasonable.
Please look carefully at the independent study conducted by Crossborder Energy, which points out several
shortcomings in Idaho Power's own study on the costs and benefits of customer-owned rooftop solar. Idaho Power
will use this study to justify trying to reduce compensation rates to solar owners. To arrive at fair rates, we first
need a fair study.
Crossborder's study states, "We conclude that Idaho Power?s choice of assumptions and calculation methods
significantly undervalue the five components that the utility quantified. We present our own calculations of an ECR
with these five elements. In addition, the VODER Study fails to quantify important benefits of distributed solar that
the Commission directed the utility to analyze in Order No. 35284 -- benefits that are known and measurable, will
impact rates, and will benefit Idaho ratepayers and citizens.?
Idahoans deserve solar rates based on a more fair and complete analysis. I urge you to reject Idaho Power's study
and look to Crossborder's study as a more accurate measure of the value (to ALL ratepayers) of customer-owned
solar power.
Sincerely,
Paul Hancock
2750 Kootenai
Pocatello, ID 83201
[e-mail]
[phone]
This message was sent by KnowWho, as a service provider, on behalf of an individual associated with Sierra Club.
If you need more information, please contact Lillian Miller at Sierra Club at [e-mail] or (415) 977-
5500.