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.
//sarcasm
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?
Maybe you need to buy some "wind power protection" to keep it safe.
Crap. I have to subsidize another green fail via my electric bill. My bills have been low due to good hydro power.