Rocky Barker still on the job reporting on Idaho's energy needs
http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2009/11/10/rockybarker/will_idaho_power_shut_down_some_its_coal_plants_next_20_years
I sat through Idaho Power’s Integrated Resource Planning meeting last week. That is where the utility lays out its future plans to a group of customers, environmental advocates and Idaho Public Utility Commission staff for their comments. The idea is the company gets feedback for its plans to build or buy power generation for the next 20 years.
It’s hard for anyone to look at what will be going on 20 years from now and the plans they make this year will clearly be changed as the utility moves along. But there are key decisions that will set long term paths that will have a major impact on Idaho Power’s rates as time goes on.
When will the company need to build its proposed transmission line from Boardman, Oregon to the Hemingway substation west of Boise? Will it be cheaper over the long run to build expensive solar generation plants in the deserts of Idaho or on people’s roofs than to build more natural gas plants?
Idaho Power’s preferred alternative is to build the transmission line and use natural gas plants to meet its peaking needs.
Earlier this year, the company’s shareholders voted strongly to push the company to do more to prepare to do business in a time of climate change. Its immediate plans don’t seem to reflect that much.
But when you move out to the second 10 years of its planning cycle the utility clearly is looking at a regulatory world where actually reducing existing coal generation makes sense. Its preferred alternative depends on natural gas wind power and the completion of the Gateway West transmission line into Wyoming to meet the need.
Idaho Power is looking at choosing that over keeping all of its coal plants operating. The preferred alternative doesn’t including nuclear, solar or more geothermal as its so-called “nuclear/green” alternative recommends.
Ultimately the most power will come over the next 20 years from improvements in energy efficiency and virtually all experts seem to agree. That’s why the $47 million smart grid stimulus grant is so influential in the company’s future.
Some industrial customers worry that Idaho Power may consider retiring some of its coal plants before the plants are paid off, leaving customers with the stranded costs. And environmentalists worry they may put more capital expenditures in old coal plants like the Boardman Coal Plant shared with Portland General Electric and others.
PGE including adding all the pollution control devices that would be needed to keep the Boardman plant open in its own integrated resource plan proposal. If PGE’s proposal is approved, the plant would require $600 million in new investment. Idaho Power's share is 10% or $60 million, said Betsy Bridge of the Idaho Conservation League.
Bridge thinks that $60 million would be better invested in alternative energy or efficiency programs. Perhaps Idaho Power’s first test for its own commitment to curtailing its coal resource over time will be whether it commits to spending the $60 million for Boardman.
It’s hard for anyone to look at what will be going on 20 years from now and the plans they make this year will clearly be changed as the utility moves along. But there are key decisions that will set long term paths that will have a major impact on Idaho Power’s rates as time goes on.
When will the company need to build its proposed transmission line from Boardman, Oregon to the Hemingway substation west of Boise? Will it be cheaper over the long run to build expensive solar generation plants in the deserts of Idaho or on people’s roofs than to build more natural gas plants?
Idaho Power’s preferred alternative is to build the transmission line and use natural gas plants to meet its peaking needs.
Earlier this year, the company’s shareholders voted strongly to push the company to do more to prepare to do business in a time of climate change. Its immediate plans don’t seem to reflect that much.
But when you move out to the second 10 years of its planning cycle the utility clearly is looking at a regulatory world where actually reducing existing coal generation makes sense. Its preferred alternative depends on natural gas wind power and the completion of the Gateway West transmission line into Wyoming to meet the need.
Idaho Power is looking at choosing that over keeping all of its coal plants operating. The preferred alternative doesn’t including nuclear, solar or more geothermal as its so-called “nuclear/green” alternative recommends.
Ultimately the most power will come over the next 20 years from improvements in energy efficiency and virtually all experts seem to agree. That’s why the $47 million smart grid stimulus grant is so influential in the company’s future.
Some industrial customers worry that Idaho Power may consider retiring some of its coal plants before the plants are paid off, leaving customers with the stranded costs. And environmentalists worry they may put more capital expenditures in old coal plants like the Boardman Coal Plant shared with Portland General Electric and others.
PGE including adding all the pollution control devices that would be needed to keep the Boardman plant open in its own integrated resource plan proposal. If PGE’s proposal is approved, the plant would require $600 million in new investment. Idaho Power's share is 10% or $60 million, said Betsy Bridge of the Idaho Conservation League.
Bridge thinks that $60 million would be better invested in alternative energy or efficiency programs. Perhaps Idaho Power’s first test for its own commitment to curtailing its coal resource over time will be whether it commits to spending the $60 million for Boardman.
