Rocky Mountain Power's recent announcement that it will only pursue natural gas and wind has some important implications. First, natural gas costs are volatile, so we can expect more increases later on. Wind, on the other hand, is cost stable. Because the wind is free as a fuel source, long-term contracts can be set to stablize the utility's power costs. I hope the Public Service Commission pushes for new cost stable energy sources. Second, Utahns need to seriously consider conservation/energy efficiency. Business Week has an article in its latest issue about LED lights that are now starting to replace CFLs as a better, even less expensive alternative. LEDs hardly use any electricity and last for 20 years! Yes, they cost $35 per bulb over 67 cents for a regular incandescent bulb, but a building owner can save $348 in power costs over one LED's lifetime compared to the lives of many incandescents' power costs (one LED lasts for about the lifetime of 60 incandescents -- think of the convenience!). Rocky Mountain Power or the state really needs to create incentives to encourage LED adoption, particularly in commercial or government buildings.

the LEDs are a good idea, but your characterization of wind power as "free" really misses the mark. There's not a wind farm in the world that's profitable. The turbines are too maintenance-intensive. It costs as much in oil and other fossil fuels to keep them running as you get from them. The only reason they're built is for the government subsidies. We're still a long way from getting a significant portion of our energy from reliable renewables.

just curious...how much more per kWh would you be willing to pay for electricity if RMP became completely dependent on renewables -- wind, solar and energy efficiency program implementations etc.?? Are you willing to pay 15, 20 or 25 cents per kWh?

Btw, RMP customers depending on total monthly use currently pay between ~7&10 cents per kWh (keep in mind that UP&L was charging about 8&1/2 cents/kWh 20 years ago). Electricity as a percentage of income has never been cheaper for Utahn's than it is right now. If RMP increase rates to pay for much more expensive resources I believe there will be a public outcry (as opposed to support and willingeness to pay for more adoption of energy efficient solutions....!) and support from the Public Service Commission will vanish.

What do you think about "nuclear power"? Warren Buffet's people are looking seriously at a nuclear power plant to be built in Idaho...what's better, coal or nuclear?

In the last 20 years if Utahn's had adopted/invested in energy efficiency technologies the growth needs for the utility would have been offset by demand reductions. That hasn't happened because for the most part the public is not committed to meaningful change overtime.

do they need a rate increase with the mass lay off of meter readers since the new meters that broadcast your usage were put in so a guy just quikly drives by?

RMP is a summer peaking utility and lighting represents an insignificant portion of the base and summer peak load -- regardless if your talking incandescents, cfl�s or led�s.

The areas of greatest increase, baseload and demand are from 1- Central AC�s & 2- refrigerators / freezers. Those are the big rocks where the biggest reductions could be realized � the utility must size for them. In other words most of the electrical infrastructure needs are only for 2 months use -- July and August.

All other issues could be considered virtually �non-issues� in Utah.