Skip to comments.Feds say Idaho Power must buy wind power [as predicted, it's not just healthcare]
Posted on 09/23/2012 11:11:31 AM PDT by matt1234Edited on 09/23/2012 2:23:41 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
BOISE -- The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says Idaho Power's long-term purchase agreement with wind farms means that it must buy electricity from the farms even when demand for power is low.
The commission's decision, reached Thursday, is good news for Idaho wind farms but a loss for the state's largest utility.
(Excerpt) Read more at nwcn.com ...
It's unclear if this is a simple contract issue. Different stories say different things. Some mention "contract." Others mention "rules." Some mention both.
Well, this is good news for those struggling family-owned wind farms. Without being able to sell the product they produce, which is immediately perishable, all those poor farmer families could starve or lose their farms.
How is any of this a Federal purview? No interstate commerce, no human or civil rights violations (i.e., some black guy isn’t happy about his work environment), no Federal issue at all in my book.
If I were the Idaho companies, I’d require the ‘energy producers’ to have constantly renewing EPA certification that no local floral and fauna have been harmed in generation and transfer of this “safe power” to the company. I’d further require that, the energy supplied meet the Buy-America First law, as well as federal guidelines for minority participation...I’d have my lawyers up their federal ass using their own regulations against them....the lawyers are on their payroll anyway, make them work for their retainers. Think outside the box.
OK... who are the resident FR photoshoppers??
I want a pic of poor Depression area farmers with wind farms. lol.
“The federal regulatory commission found the rules don’t allow for unilateral curtailment, and that any associated costs were taken into consideration when the long-term agreements were created.”
So now the Federal Government is helping to enforce Long Term Contracts that Idaho Power signed without taking into consideration possible long term market factors?
What is the world coming to when a party to a contact is not permitted to break the contract when market factors change?
They force the power companies in WA State to buy wind energy, also, even though we have more than enough hydro-power to supply our energy needs. The reason is that the excess power all goes to California, where the voters don’t want any type of power plants in their own state.
I read a newspaper this summer, from San Luis Obispo, that ran article about the fact that the Marin County Sierra Club was refusing to endorse a long time supporter of the Sierra Club for re-election because he had supported the construction of a solar power plant in Marin County. Marin County has also scrapped plans for a de-salinization plant, saying that conservation is a better way to go.
All private power production (over a certain size) in the U.S. is regulated by FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commision). Has been for a long time.
This was an interesting article today about the utter impraticality of solar/wind/gerbal/squirrel power..
How is this??
Then how do “wind” energy producers come under FERC if they aren’t above that size limit? Regardless, the real energy producers could get more creative in their resistance to bad government interdiction in their private endeavors, regardless of the FERC....
For whatever reason Idaho Power signed a long term contact with the wind power producers and now wants the terms of the contract changed due to various market conditions.
However, the purpose of a contract is to hold the parties to an agreement over a specific time period despite any market changes that make take place.
Idaho Power should have specified in their contract that their obligation to buy electricity from the wind power would change if demand decreased or if the cost of natural gas fell.
Are you of the belief that any party to any contract should be able to change the terms of a contract when market conditions change?
For example, would you advocate the company that holds your fixed rate mortgage change the interest rate you pay from 3.75% to 18.6% simply because interest rates increase in five years?
The problem with wind energy is still the same as it always was, the energy is only produced when the wind blows and that is highest at night, when energy usage is lowest. In WA State the wind producers sued because the hydro power companies didn’t have the line capacity to add the wind energy to California at the time it was produced, so the tax payers in WA were forced to pay for added transmission lines to send power to CA.
Read about the Shepherd Flats Wind Farm in Oregon, that was built by GE, with just about 100% government subsidies and loans (like Solyndra).
Power contracts are all politically motivated. What looks good under one administration, often doesn’t sit so well as power structures change and elections approach, and government subsidies expire.
What did the power customers have to say about the Wind contracts? The customers can force a change in the contracts by claiming that the contracts were signed without fully informing the customers.
I guess I could tell you that being forced into a contract in the first place because of government intervention or requirement is not “free business”....
Let’s face it, these companies would not have entered into the original agreements unless they were forced to.
And don’t drag the mortgage canard into it. It isn’t relevant.
Re: “They force the power companies in WA State to buy wind energy, even though we have more than enough hydro-power.”
It’s even worse than that.
The Feds and local Greens are systematically tearing down our dams, which produce the cleanest and cheapest electricity in America.
Great news for salmon.
Not so great for consumers.
If that is the case, Idaho Power should have specified such possibilities in the contract with the wind power producers.
Can you cite the law that states that Idaho Power would be forced into signing such a contract?
Idaho Power while regulated is a private company and as private company does not have to get the approval of all its customers prior to entering into a contract.
Maybe it’s not the same in Idaho, but in WA, voters have final say over power contracts and rates. They can’t do anything without voter approval and that is understood, it doesn’t have to be spelled out.
There are no profits in wind energy, outside of government subsidies because the power must used when it is produced, whether it is needed or not and whether there is line capacity at that time or not.
Maybe you need to buy some "wind power protection" to keep it safe.
I am not advocating for any alternative fuel source, but simply stating that parties that sign a contract should abide by the terms of the contract.
I live in WA. This is the state that determined that hydro-electric energy is a non-renewable resource. Apparently once the water has gone past the dam, it’s never coming back. A democrat-run state, what can you expect?
“They cant do anything without voter approval and that is understood, it doesnt have to be spelled out.”
Sorry, I did not know that Washington State was entrenched under the thumb of Marxism where the public dictated every aspect of a private company’s business.
That is pretty awesome.
Windmills in the Dustbowl Era
I already parodied this:
On the contrary, while WA State is very Marxist, the voter review of power company rate increases is as it should be because our hydro dams were built by the government and sold to private power companies. I am not sure that the actual dams were sold, but the right to operate them was sold.
Your wind farms were built with federal dollars as well, so what’s the difference?
NO I can’t cite them....I don’t own an electric utility generation company, but I know in the past other electric utilities have been forced, either by state or federal law to buy excess wind-generated power. That’s pretty much a given as far as I’m concerned. They wouldn’t be doing it in the first place if they weren’t forced to.
Tru dat...it’s just like damned ethanol....
The power producing dams in your state are not owned by private companies.
And any agreements that your power companies may have with the federal government are not relevant as to why the people of Washington State would be abel to dictate to these private companies what they can and cannot do.
And being the the federal taxpayer paid for those dams to be built in Washington State, can citizens of California, New York, Florida and Texas dictate the prices that people in Washington State pay for electricity?
Why would Idaho Power sign a long term contract to buy wind generated power when they were already forced by law to buy wind generated power?
Seems a bit redundant.
My guess is they were forced into renewing.....only a guess. Where the government is involved, one never knows. Ask the premium bond holders of GMs equity. After Obama’s henchmen got through with their threats, they got pennies on the dollar, if that.
Wind and solar generation industries are subsidized....have been almost since their inception...just like the VOLT, just like Ethanol, just like most any other industry that tickles some tree hugger’s fancy or can put large donations in a Democrat’s pocket.
This isn’t worth talking about anymore. Wasted energy...bye
I said that I wasn’t sure if the state actually sold the dams or just the rights to operate the dams, but all power companies in the state are regulated by some commission that approves or disapproves rate increases and those increases usually go to the voters first.
It’s the way it is set up here. We don’t need any “green energy”, we have enough hydro-power to supply all the power that the state needs, but they have never operated the dams at full capacity.
Wind energy is a scam. There is no money in it, outside of federal subsidies. Take away the federal subsidies and the whole wind energy industry would collapse. Studies indicate that 80% of the wind turbines that are erected cease to be operated within ten years of construction, so they just sit there, as giant eye sores.
Crap. I have to subsidize another green fail via my electric bill. My bills have been low due to good hydro power.
Heh. You won't when they blow up all the dams.
So far the judges have been ruling against blowing up anymore dams. The courts have even been ruling against the tribes killing the sea lions around the dams, that eat the salmon, saying that it was unconscionable for the Indians to kill the hungry sea lions just so the tribes could catch the salmon and sell them to hungry humans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.