DOCSLIB.ORG

Idaho Power's Collaborative Cloud Seeding Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Idaho Power's Collaborative Cloud Seeding Program Idaho Power’s Collaborative Cloud Seeding Program Kresta Davis Water Resources and Policy Senior Manager Natural Resources Interim Committee Meeting October 15, 2020 Communities We Serve 1 Hells Canyon 1391,500 kW 2 Oxbow 1 190,000 kW 3 Brownlee 1 675,000 kW Cascade 12,420 kW MORE THAN 4 1 5 Swan Falls 1 27,200 kW 570,000 6 C.J. Strike 1 82,800 kW CUSTOMERS 7 Bliss 1 75,000 kW 8 Lower Malad 1 13,500 kW 9 Upper Malad 1 8,300 kW 10 Lower Salmon 1 60,000 kW 11 Upper Salmon 1 34,500 kW 12 Thousand Springs 1 6,800 kW 13 Clear Lake 1 2,500 kW 14 Shoshone Falls 1 11,500 kW 15 Twin Falls 1 52,900 kW 16 Milner 1 59,448 kW 17 American Falls 1 92,340 kW Clean Energy 2019 Energy Mix National Average * * About the sale of renewable energy credits: Idaho Power sells the Renewable Energy Credits (REC) associated with our renewable energy purchases on Long- Term Purchases and a small portion of our hydro generation to offset power supply costs and keep customer prices as low as possible. The buyer of the REC claims the renewable attributes of that energy; therefore, Idaho Power does not represent that this resource mix represents the energy delivered to our customers. * Competitive Prices 20% BELOW Why Cloud Seed? Benefits of Additional Water Supply • Greater reliability for storage and natural flow water users • Higher reservoir carryover from year to year • Water quality • Improved fisheries conditions • Federal flow augmentation program • Resident fisheries • Additional recreation opportunities • Improved aquifer management through managed recharge and other activities • Further supports low cost, clean hydropower • Supports state economy and growth What is Cloud Seeding? • Cloud seeding depends upon an abundance of super cooled liquid (SLW) water in the atmosphere • Cloud seeding provides additional efficient ice nuclei • Silver Iodide released into the atmosphere creates additional ice nuclei • Works at warmer temperatures, allowing ice formation • Cloud seeding has been used as: • Fog suppression • Hail suppression • Rainfall enhancement • Snowpack enhancement • Snowpack enhancement utilizing orographic lift Resources to Support Cloud Seeding Idaho Power and Contract Staff Five meteorologists/atmospheric scientists Six field personnel Aircraft and supporting crew Equipment Remote and manual ground generators Aircraft Radiometers and hi-resolution precipitation gauges Models and Forecasting Tools WRF, WRF-CSM, WRF-Hydro High performance computer Hydrologic models Idaho Power’s Cloud Seeding Program • 1993 – Began investigating cloud seeding at the request of shareholder • 2003 (5 generators, 1 aircraft) Ground Generators by Year Operational project began in the 60 Payette basin • 2008 – ESPA CAMP identified cloud 50 seeding a component of the plan 40 36 5-year pilot program in the Upper Snake 30 26 27 COUNT • 2010 – Began working with WW RC&D 19 to evaluate seeding the headwaters of 20 13 the Snake River 10 10 • WY 2014 (36 generators, 1 aircraft) At the request of Big Wood Canal 0 Company, expanded into Wood 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 River basin with aircraft from Upper Snake Wood Boise Boise/Wood Payette Total Payette basin Idaho Power’s Cloud Seeding Program • WY 2015 (44 generators, 2 aircraft) ESPA CAMP Upper Snake 5-year pilot complete Ground Generators by Year 57 Collaborative funding from the State 60 55 55 for equipment associated with 53 50 expansion in the Boise Basin 44 • WY 2016 (53 generators, 3 aircraft) 40 36 36 Collaborative funding from the State and water users for continued 30 26 27 program growth and operations COUNT 19 Additional ground generators in 20 13 Boise, Wood and Upper Snake 10 Third aircraft added targeting the 10 Upper Snake basin 0 • Current buildout (57 generators, 3 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 aircraft) Upper Snake Wood Boise Boise/Wood Payette Total 2019-2020 Operations Cloud Seeding Operations 2019-2020 Cloud Seeding Operations 2019-2020 Ground generator hours Aircraft hours 5000 250 4500 4000 200 3500 3000 150 2500 2000 100 AIRCRAFT HOURS GENERATOR HOURS 1500 1000 50 500 0 0 November December January February March April Total November December January February March April Total Upper Snake Wood River Boise Basin Payette Upper Snake Wood River Boise Basin Payette Program Costs Annual Collaborative Funding Percentage of Total Program Cost $3,000 Idaho Power FY 2019 FY 2020 $2,500 Water Users Idaho Water Resource Board IWRB 44% 48% $2,000 Boise Basin Water Users 20% 20% $1,500 Idaho Power 36% 32% $1,000 IWRB 48% 53% DOLLARS ($1,000) DOLLARS Wood River Basin Water Users 34% 32% $500 Idaho Power 18% 15% $0 Boise Wood Upper Total Boise Wood Upper Total IWRB 20% 22% Snake Snake Upper Snake Basin Water Users 17% 17% FY 2019 FY 2020 Idaho Power 63% 61% Source: Legislative Services Office, Budget and Policy Analysis Annual Benefit Estimates Average annual natural flow benefits Boise Basin 229,000 acre-ft Wood River Basin 113,000 acre-ft Upper Snake Basin 424,000 acre-ft Above Palisades 280,000 acre-ft Henry’s Fork 144,000 acre-ft Payette (Idaho Power) 212,000 acre-ft Total 978,000 acre-ft Questions? Idaho Power’s Water Quality Program Managing at a Watershed Scale Ralph Myers Water Quality Program Manager Natural Resources Interim Committee Clean Water Act §401 certification -Certifications are issued by the state where the project is located -Certifies that the project will not result in, or contribute to, a violation of the State water quality standards -All of IPC’s projects are in Idaho except for the Hells Canyon Complex. On boundary waters certifications are required from both states (Idaho and Oregon). -§ 401 certifications define mitigation measures Water quality issues addressed by IPC’s hydro project’s Clean Water Act §401 certification -Water temperature -Dissolved oxygen -Nuisance aquatic plant growth (macrophytes) -Harmful Algae Blooms (HABs) -mercury (methyl mercury) Issue: Water temperature Mitigation measure: Snake River Stewardship Program Implementation Details: Addresses temperature by reducing solar thermal loading to the Snake River and its tributaries 25 Island Projects 150 miles of streambank Issue: Dissolved oxygen Mitigation Measure: Aerate water leaving the dam Implementation Details: -Blowers at American Falls and Cascade -Aerating runners at Brownlee Issue: Dissolved oxygen Mitigation measure: Riverside Irrigation District Project Implementation Details: Riverside uses higher nutrient water for irrigation. This improves dissolved oxygen conditions in Brownlee Reservoir. Issue: Dissolved oxygen Mitigation measure: Grand View Project Implementation Details : Reduces runoff to the Snake River. This improves oxygen conditions in Brownlee Reservoir. Issue: Nuisance aquatic plants Mitigation measure: Macrophyte removal at Upper Salmon Falls, Lower Salmon Falls, and Bliss projects Implementation Details : Remove floating nuisance vegetation from the river and improves oxygen conditions in CJ Strike Reservoir . Issue: Harmful Algae Blooms (HABs) Mitigation measure: Monitor, post warnings, investigate control measures Implementation Details : -Work with USGS to develop a satellite imagery tool to track and identify HABs. -IPC posts warning signs at projects and on social media. - Reduce nutrients to lower HAB frequency and intensity. Issue: Mercury (methyl mercury) Mitigation measure: Study mercury in the Hells Canyon Complex, develop a management plan, and implement the plan Implementation Details : -Partnering with USGS on a 10-year study. -Identify ways to control methylation -Improve oxygen in Brownlee Reservoir to lower mercury levels in fish Collaboration throughout the Snake River -Upper Snake Basin Advisory Group -Southwest Basin Advisory Group -Mid Snake Watershed Advisory Group -Lake Walcott Watershed Advisory Group -Southern Idaho Water Quality Coalition -Lower Boise Watershed Council -Boise River Enhancement Network -IDEQ Annual Water Quality Workshop Summary and Conclusion IPC has numerous water quality mitigation projects throughout the Snake River Hells Canyon mitigation has focused on watershed projects -potential to address multiple issues -benefits to larger geographic areas -benefits to more stakeholders Water quality improvement efforts by all stakeholders are showing measurable benefits Basin-wide water quality approaches are key to managing Snake River water quality Continued improvements could be realized through expanded support and collaboration Questions? Thank You .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Recreational Use Associated with the Snake River in the Hells Canyon
    5HFUHDWLRQDO 8VH $VVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH 6QDNH 5LYHU LQ WKH +HOOV &DQ\RQ 1DWLRQDO 5HFUHDWLRQ $UHD Hh uhyy7 Srp rhvSr pr6hy 7HFKQLFDO 5HSRUW $SSHQGL[ ( Ari h !! 5HYLVHG-XO\ Cryy8h8yr A@S8I (& &RS\ULJKWE\,GDKR3RZHU&RPSDQ\ Idaho Power Company Recreational Use Associated with the Snake River TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iii List of Figures................................................................................................................................ iii List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................ vii Abstract............................................................................................................................................1 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................3 1.1. Associated Studies and Technical Reports ........................................................................3 1.2. USFS–HCNRA Boating-Related Regulations...................................................................4 1.2.1. Types of Watercraft Allowed in the HCNRA...........................................................4 1.2.2. Boating Regulation
    [Show full text]
  • View Annual Report
    Stepping Forward Entering a new era for energy. 2009 Annual Report $2.64 $2.51 $2.17 $1.86 IDACORP is stepping forward on $1.50 all fronts ensuring your company is positioned to succeed in a new era for energy. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Earnings Per Share (Diluted) Current Annual Dividend $1.20 2009 Highlights Thousands of Dollars, Except Per Share Amounts 2009 2008 % Change 9.5% 8.9% 7.5% 6.8% Electric Utility Revenues $1,045,996 $956,076 9.4 6.2% Other Revenue $3,804 $4,338 <12.3> Total Operating Revenues $1,049,800 $960,414 9.3 Net Income $124,350 $98,414 26.4 Earnings Per Diluted Common Share $2.64 $2.17 21.7 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Dividends Paid Per Common Share $1.20 $1.20 -- Return on Total Assets $4,238,727 $4,022,845 5.4 Year-End Equity Number of Employees (full time) 1,994 2,073 <3.8> 36.4% 20.8% IDACORP, Inc.—Boise, Idaho-based and formed in 1998—is a holding 16.5% 16.1% 13.6% company comprised of Idaho Power Company, a regulated electric 10.7% utility; IDACORP Financial, a holder of affordable housing projects and other real estate investments; and Ida-West Energy, an operator of small hydroelectric generation projects that satisfy the requirements 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. IDACORP’s origins -0.1% -5.6% -13.0% lie with Idaho Power and operations beginning in 1916. Today, Idaho Power employs 1,994 people to serve a 24,000 square-mile service area -25.9% in southern Idaho and eastern Oregon.
    [Show full text]
  • FORM 10-K (Mark One)
    Table of Contents UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) X ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 OR TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from ................... to ................................................................. Exact name of registrants as specified in Commission their charters, address of principal executive IRS Employer File Number offices, zip code and telephone number Identification Number 1-14465 IDACORP, Inc. 82-0505802 1-3198 Idaho Power Company 82-0130980 1221 W. Idaho Street Boise, ID 83702-5627 (208) 388-2200 State of incorporation: Idaho Name of exchange on SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT: which registered IDACORP, Inc.: Common Stock, without par value New York Stock Exchange SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT: Idaho Power Company: Preferred Stock Indicate by check mark whether the registrants are well-known seasoned issuers, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. IDACORP, Inc. Yes (X) No ( ) Idaho Power Company Yes ( ) No (X) Indicate by check mark if the registrants are not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. IDACORP, Inc. Yes ( ) No (X) Idaho Power Company Yes ( ) No (X) Indicate by check mark whether the registrants (1) have filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrants were required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
    [Show full text]
  • Q4 2020 Investor Information
    Bank of America Power, Gas, & Solar Leadership Conference Q4 2020 Investor Information March 2-3, 2021 Forward-Looking Statements In addition to the historical information contained in this presentation, this presentation contains (and oral communications made by IDACORP, Inc. and Idaho Power Company may contain) statements, including, without limitation, earnings guidance and estimated key operating and financial metrics, that relate to future events and expectations and, as such, constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to, expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, outlook, assumptions, or future events or performance, often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “continues,” “could,” “estimates,” “expects,” “guidance,” “intends,” “potential,” “plans,” “predicts,” “projects,” “targets,” or similar expressions, are not statements of historical facts and may be forward-looking. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve estimates, assumptions, risks, and uncertainties. Actual results, performance, or outcomes may differ materially from the results discussed in the statements. In addition to any assumptions and other factors and matters referred to specifically in connection with such forward-looking statements, factors that could cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements
    [Show full text]
  • Hells Canyon Complex Total Dissolved Gas Study
    Hells Canyon Complex Total Dissolved Gas Study Ralph Myers Project Limnologist Sharon E. Parkinson Principal Engineer Technical Report Appendix E.2.2-4 March 2002 Revised July 2003 Hells Canyon Complex FERC No. 1971 Copyright © 2003 by Idaho Power Company Idaho Power Company Hells Canyon Complex Total Dissolved Gas Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i List of Tables...................................................................................................................................ii List of Figures .................................................................................................................................ii List of Appendices .........................................................................................................................iii Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 2 2. Study Area.................................................................................................................................. 3 3. Plant Operations ......................................................................................................................... 4 4. Methods.....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the 1984 Swan Falls Settlement
    UNDERSTANDING THE 1984 SWAN FALLS SETTLEMENT CLIVE J. STRONG & MICHAEL C. ORR FULL CITATION: Clive J. Strong & Michael C. Orr, Understanding the 1984 Swan Falls Settlement, 52 IDAHO L. REV. 223 (2016). This article Copyright © 2016 Idaho Law Review. Except as otherwise expressly provided, permission is hereby granted to photocopy this article for classroom use, provided that: (1) Copies are distributed at or below cost; (2) The author of the article and the Idaho Law Review are properly identified; (3) Proper notice of the copyright is affixed to each copy; and (4) Notice of the use is given to the Idaho Law Review. UNDERSTANDING THE 1984 SWAN FALLS SETTLEMENT CLIVE J. STRONG & MICHAEL C. ORR TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 224 II. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................ 226 III. THE SWAN FALLS CONTROVERSY AND SETTLEMENT ....................... 230 A. The Lawsuits ............................................................................................ 231 B. The Legislative Subordination Battle ....................................................... 234 C. The Negotiations ...................................................................................... 235 D. The Settlement “Framework” ................................................................... 237 E. The “Trust” Concept ................................................................................. 239
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho Falls Power
    INTRODUCTION The first public utility in America began over Although Idaho Falls was not the first community to own and 120 years ago. The efforts of the early electrical operate its municipal utility, it is one of the oldest public power pioneers have allowed the nation’s municipal utilities communities in the Northwest. The city of Idaho Falls is to give inexpensive, reliable electric power to millions celebrating the past 100 years of providing its residents of Americans in the twentieth century. Today municipal ownership in its electric power system. This report municipal utilities give over 2,000 communities a will provide some interesting facts about the pioneers who sense of energy independence and autonomy they can installed a tiny electric generator on an irrigation canal in the carry into the twenty-first century. fall of 1900, establishing the beginning of the Idaho Falls municipal utility. Lucille Keefer pictured in front of the falls, is one of the more endearing images of Idaho Falls’ hydroelectric history. The Pennsylvania-born school teacher was the wife of the project’s construction superintendent. THE CANAL ERA The original 1900 power plant generated electricity from the water tumbling out of an irrigation ditch. When the Utah and Northern Railroad extended its tracks During the 1880s and 1890s, lumberyards, flourmills, to the rapids on the Snake River in 1879, the small town livestock auction houses, newspapers, banks, and clothing of Eagle Rock (now Idaho Falls) was established. The stores sprouted up along the railroad tracks. Population turn of the century not only brought more people to the surged as merchants and professionals flocked to the city to newly formed community but new developments as well.
    [Show full text]
  • (COE1) Comments/Responsens/Attachments U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    Idaho Power Company Responses to Comments U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS—COE1 Hells Canyon Complex Page 1 Responses to Comments Idaho Power Company U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—COE1 Page 2 Hells Canyon Complex Idaho Power Company Responses to Comments U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—COE1 Hells Canyon Complex Page 3 Responses to Comments Idaho Power Company U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—COE1 Page 4 Hells Canyon Complex Idaho Power Company Responses to Comments RESPONSE TO COMMENT COE1-1 Comment noted. Please see Exhibit B for more information regarding IPC’s proposal for flood control requirements in the license application. RESPONSE TO COMMENT COE1-2 The flood control routine incorporated into the CHEOPS operations model uses the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s (ACOE) 1998 modified procedure. This methodology is presented in Exhibit B. The flood control target elevations calculated by the model are based on observed flows through the HCC, providing a theoretical drawdown of Brownlee Reservoir during this period. This theoretical drawdown is not influenced by day-to-day influences or human intervention. By establishing this theoretical operation, other reservoir operation scenario comparisons can be made on a consistent basis. It is not IPC’s intention to change the general flood control requirements for the HCC in the new license. IPC is currently working with Chan Modini of the ACOE’s Hydrologic Engineering Branch (in Portland, OR) to develop an updated flood control article for the new license. The article would be based on the 1998 modified procedure for determining the flood control draft at Brownlee Reservoir.
    [Show full text]
  • Swan Falls Project Consultation Appendix
    Idaho Power Company Consultation Technical Appendix CONSULTATION SUMMARY, RELATED CHARTS, AND CORRESPONDENCE APPLICATION FOR NEW LICENSE SWAN FALLS PROJECT FERC NO. 503 Narrative Summary of Idaho Power Company’s Consultation Efforts New License Application for the Swan Falls Hydroelectric Project Consultation Appendix Swan Falls Project June 2008 FERC No. 503 © 2008 Idaho Power Idaho Power Company Consultation Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 Consultation Overview ....................................................................................................................1 Informal Consultation ......................................................................................................................2 First Stage Formal Consultation Pursuant to 18 CFR § 16.8...........................................................5 Formal Consultation Package, Including Study Recommendations—March 2005 ..................5 Aquatic Resources ...............................................................................................................5 Wildlife Resources...............................................................................................................6 Botanical Resources.............................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • American Falls Reservoir Is the Largest Reservoir of the Project
    Finding of No Significant Impact Final Environmental Assessment Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Spillway and Dam Structures at American Falls Dam, Minidoka Project, Power County, Idaho U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Snake River Area Office PN FONSI # 19-4 Introduction The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has prepared this Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) to comply with the Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This document briefly describes the proposed action, other alternatives considered, the scoping process, Reclamation’s consultation and coordination activities, mitigation, and Reclamation’s finding. The Final Environmental Assessment (EA) fully documents the analyses of the potential environmental effects of implementing the changes proposed. Location and Background The Minidoka Project (Project) was authorized by the Secretary of the Interior in 1904 and was the first Reclamation project constructed in Idaho. It is located in the Snake River Basin in the southeastern part of the state. American Falls Dam, completed in 1927, is a 94-foot-high composite concrete and earth gravity-type dam on river mile 714.7 of the Snake River near American Falls, Idaho. With a storage capacity of 1,700,000 acre-feet, American Falls Reservoir is the largest reservoir of the Project. The dam itself is located in Power County, Idaho, but the reservoir stretches northeast into both Bingham and Bannock Counties. American Falls Dam and Reservoir comprise a multi-purpose facility from which principle benefits include irrigation, power generation (through a powerplant owned and operated by Idaho Power), flood control, fish and wildlife resources, and recreation.
    [Show full text]
  • (E.3.2-35) Ice Formation on Brownlee Reservoir and Potential Effects on Big Game Populations
    Ice Formation on Brownlee Reservoir and Potential Effects on Big Game Populations R. Ryel Ryel and Associates North Logan, UT N. Mesner Dept. of Geography & Earth Resources Utah State University S. Jensen White Horse Associates Smithfield, UT Technical Report Appendix E.3.2-35 December 2001 Revised July 2003 (Minor Typographical Changes) Hells Canyon Complex FERC No. 1971 Copyright © 2003 by Idaho Power Company Ice Formation on Brownlee Reservoir and Potential Effects on Big Game Populations Technical Report Appendix E.3.2-35 Final Draft December 2001 Prepared for: Idaho Power Company Boise, Idaho Prepared by: R. Ryel Ryel and Associates North Logan, Utah N. Mesner Department of Geography and Earth Resources Utah State University Logan, Utah S. Jensen White Horse Associates Smithfield, Utah Brownlee Reservoir Ice—Effects on Big Game Table of Contents Table of Contents...................................................................................................i List of Tables.........................................................................................................ii List of Figures........................................................................................................ii ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................... 2 1.1. Background .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Greenpower Energy
    Idaho Power’s Green Power Product Content Label This label is part of our Green-e Energy certification and is provided to participants each year. The label shows the anticipated sources of Green Power for 2019. 2019 Prospective Product Content Label 1 100% Green-e Energy Certified New2 Renewables Generation facilities’ location: Idaho, Oregon, or Washington Energy Resource Mix: 50% Solar, 50% Wind 1. These figures reflect the renewables that we plan to provide. Actual figures may vary according to resource availability. Before August 1 of next year, we will provide a Historical Product Content Label to report the actual resource mix of the green power purchased for the previous calendar year. 2. New Renewables come from generation facilities that first began commercial operation within the past 15 years. How does Green Power compare to the standard energy mix? Hydro 46.4% Idaho Power’s 2018 mix of resources supplying Idaho Power customers included: Hydroelectric (46.4%), Purchased Power (28.6%), Coal (17.5%), Purchased and Natural Gas & Diesel (7.5%). Power (Purchased Power includes energy originally generated from renewable 28.6% facilities. Idaho Power sells its Renewable Energy Certificates (REC) from these resources and proceeds benefit all customers. Because Idaho Power does not retain the RECs, the electricity is not counted as renewable energy delivered to customers.) Coal 17.5% How is green power sold? Green Power is sold in blocks of 100 kilowatt-hours (kWh) or matches 100 Natural Gas & Diesel percent of your energy (kWh) use. 7.5% What’s the average energy use for a home? The average home in Idaho Power’s service area uses about 950 kWh per month (Idaho Power 2018).
    [Show full text]