Comments on: Dynamis Deal Declared DOA in Wyoming

By: EdNorton

EdNorton — Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:43:05 +0000

Zippo, while I agree, I believe the greatest problem we have is an uniformed electorate who, for reasons to be determined, are more focused on trout fishing than what these people are doing in office. Look at the track record of Yzaguirre – how did that man get in office? http://www.boiseweekly.com/boise/taxing-the-public-trust/Content?oid=923761

It would be a joke, but it is really not funny! The joke is on us! And to think Ullman ran for Governor!

By: Zippo

Zippo — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 23:32:07 +0000

The basic error the commissioners made was to forget they are merely representing the people of the county. This is a common error these day in many elected offices. Once elected, for some reason, the office holder gets a big head and starts making decisions which are often beyond their technical qualifications and which do not have the backing of the majority of the community. Often it seems the office holders give preference to people and/or companies who stroke them and gratify them personally, rather than what’s good for the community or supported by the populous. This is arrogance, and contempt for the commoner’s wishes. It can be seen in the exchange with a city council member in other recent Guardian posts. They think they are sitting in the Roman Senate or something. Term Limits is a great idea which we must somehow make real at every level. The US presidency is the greatest example of the effectiveness of term limits… Just imagine without them in that office.

By: Fix it

Fix it — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 21:48:15 +0000

The 2 commishes still there should realize Ada County doesn’t want it here, admit they made a mistake, have the prosecutor undo the contract, get the $2 million back and they could make themselves a hero.

If they won’t, the public should sign a petition and get ’em out of there asap.

By: Karen Ragland

Karen Ragland — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:58:05 +0000

Thank God the Wyoming commisioners have some smarts. I think “dummy” pills are a dime a dozen. Do public officials ever research anything or just accept whatever a “snake oil” salesman has to sell them?
Make a mental note of this when replacement of public officials come up for re-election. PLEASE

EDITOR NOTE–There are those who would say, “1 down, 1 to go.”

By: chicago sam

chicago sam — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:13:03 +0000

Key word in the cowboy logic is “researched”. No indication that Ada County did that

By: Zippo

Zippo — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 14:55:50 +0000

$92.53 per MW?? Are you nuts!?!?! Not a chance anyone is looking out for the end power user with prices like that.

By: boisecynic

boisecynic — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 13:32:26 +0000

Continuing my series of posts in the It’s-never-so-simple vein, eveyone needs to go back and read this from January:

https://boiseguardian.com/2012/01/13/boise-attorney-opposed-to-dynamis-deal/

I don’t mean the article, I mean the comment by Gene Fadness from the Idaho Public Utilities Commission.

I’ll just quote it here for those who can’t be bothered to click and scroll:

Hello. This is Gene Fadness from the Idaho Public Utilities Commission. I appreciate all the comments here. I wouldn’t dare take a position for the commissioners who will ultimately decide this case. But there are some key facts about the pricing for this contract that are being missed here. One is that this is a levalized contract that stays at the $92.53 per MW over the life of the 20 years. So you need to project power supply cost over 20 years to come up with an apples-to-apples comparison of what ratepayers will pay over the life of the contract. Second, Dynamis is unique among all small-power projects in that it is committed to deliver 20 MW of non-intermittent energy solely during heavy load hours when prices of other generation at peak times may well — and will very likely — exceed the Dynamis price. The project has a peak-hour capacity factor of 92 percent, higher than almost any other baseload small-power source. Again, I am NOT saying the contract should be approved, but these factors should be considered in the debate. Watch for staff comments on this case to be filed, also by Feb. 2. You can view them on our Website at http://www.puc.idaho.gov

By: Ada Fools

Ada Fools — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:12:54 +0000

As it unravels, everyone can see how bad this deal was and why the Ada commissioners needed to be investigated. And removed.

By: Zippo

Zippo — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 04:53:36 +0000

Something must have occurred to cloud the judgment of two of our commissioners. I sure hope the investigating turns up whatever that something was.

If the product and company’s prior success was misrepresented… then I think that aspect also needs investigation right?