The way an idea is explained in both writing and data can be clear or obfuscating, honest or misleading. Idaho Power's recent full page ad in the Mt. Express is misleading on both counts.

In a "Letter to Valued Customers," the utility writes about its ongoing dedication to producing some of the cleanest energy in the country by using "zero-carbon resources of wind, solar, and hydroelectric."  Oddly, the numerical data for the ingredients of its fuel mix don't even mention solar. It is likely buried in the 3.4% of "other renewables." 

Idaho Power's fuel mix is nearly evenly split between carbon-based and renewable sources: 41% of its electricity is sourced from carbon and natural gas; 50% comes from renewable hydropower. Of course, hydropower is increasing questionable as a renewable given its harmful fishery effects, the massive sediment deposits climbing up the walls of dams, and declining water supplies.  

As for providing some of the cleanest energy in the country? I couldn't find Idaho Power's ranking but did find a list of the top 10 clean energy providers in the U.S. and the utility wasn't on it. In fact, the Valley's local energy experts have been working with Idaho Power to try to bring it into the 21st century, pushing the utility to adapt to the new market realities and opportunities of renewable energy. 

But the utility wants to sustain its increasingly outdated business model. Idaho Power's Letter explains that it wants a revision to the 1976 Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA). The federal law requires public utilities to purchase power from "outside" renewable energy providers, e.g. large-scale developers or residential customers who, on their own, are producing excess wind, solar, or hydroelectricity. Twenty-year contracts are required with a fixed rate to providers. The law was intended to break the vertically-integrated, monopolistic structure of utilities and allow nascent, non-utility, clean energy producers to hook into the utility grid and gain a slice of the market

The Mt. Express reports that, in the past few months, Idaho Power has signed 13 twenty-year contracts with four companies. Now, not wanting to continue such long-term commitments in a free market in which solar costs are dropping, the utility is asking Idaho's Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to allow two-year contracts, arguing 20-year contracts lead to purchasing unneeded electricity at a potentially higher-than-market rate. "Billions of dollars in energy costs" would be passed to consumers, says Idaho Power, a "burden" it is reluctant to impose. Of course, as regulations require better environmental performance from carbon-based energy, particularly coal, costs will also be incurred (and passed on to customers).

The situation is complex. But it comes down to which "penalty" (or opportunity) makes most sense for Idaho Power, consumers, and the environment. The utility has had 38 years since PURPA was passed to "get the point." And it has failed to adjust to the quickly declining costs of solar installation, a reality that has power companies across the U.S. shaking in their potential burial shoes. According to many reports, the grid will soon be an optional service, rather than a basic necessity.  

Meanwhile, Idaho Power is doing very well. A 2007-2013 report shows share price nearly doubling in that period to $3.64, net income increasing by 130%, and executive compensation growing by an average 112%; in 2013, the top three executives earned roughly $3 million, $1.8 mill. and $1.4 million. During the same period, Idahoans' personal income increased by just 8.9%. 

In a recent Insight Weekly, I wrote that Ohio Gulch might, in the next few years, be the site of a multi-acre solar electric farm built by Sagebrush Solar, a local business. Without a 20-year contract, however, financing the project is impossible; the plan is dead. The Valley no longer has the opportunity to reduce its carbon footprint through the farm or to build momentum for other such state-of-the-art projects. Months of work by Sagebrush Solar, its potential business growth, and local jobs are out the window. 

If Idaho Power can gain approval for two-year contracts (not yet a done deal), many other smaller producers will be shut out or have to find a way to operate off-the-grid.  As the utility's user numbers decline, prices will rise for the remaining captive audience until the market corrects itself one way or the other. The handwriting is on the wall. Idaho Power must begin a smooth shift to greater use of renewables or it will slide inevitably toward a massive disruption to the business and its customers. (I won't even discuss the potential impact of Elon Musk's solar storage battery).

In the face of this recent setback, Ketchum's Energy Advisory Committee and the Wood River Renewable Energy group are putting even more "energy" into achieving locally-sourced renewable electricity, energy efficiency and conservation, and a reduced carbon footprint. We should be hearing more from them in the next few weeks. Meanwhile, read communications from Idaho Power with a skeptical mind, a critical eye, and a pinch of salt.

Until next week....Jima Rice