Public Comment
February 6, 2025
Board Finance Committee
Meeting
1 Lori Taketa
From: Walter Paniak
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2025 4:59 PM
To: Lori Taketa
Subject: Comments for the Finance Committee date Feb 6 2025 Attachments: IMG_4217.png; IMG_4223.jpeg; IMG_4221.jpeg; IMG_4219.png Comments to RCEA Finance Committee
Background
I received some information at 4:18pm yesterday dealing with a question that has bothered me concerning how HSC report data to RCEA and how data is reported to the EIA and CEC.
The data question is. Why does the Humboldt Sawmill Company appear to have inconsistent reporting data. The RCEA schedule one data shows 3 generators for the past several years. However, The EIA 923 data for HSC shows 2 generators, this same data appears to be reported to the California Energy Commission. See screenshots below
This has been reported to RCEA last fall. The reply suggested that I ask HSC for an explanation. That was the reason that I requested the RCEA schedule one data to see if things balanced.
Comment 1
It has been reported to me that HSC has a PG&E rate payer account and not a RCEA account. As a rate payer can I be assured that the system does not allow HSC to generate power going to RCEA while using some PG&E power for internal operations?
(That could be 70+dollars going to us versus about 46 dollars for PG&E power) Comment 2.
In my opinion the contracted rate is very over priced. I seem to recall that before “Covid “ Richard Engel stated that at one time in the early days of the HSC contract the payments were over 2 million dollars above the market rate in a year. We are paying in the 70 dollar range this minute for HSC power.
However, the so called market is really confusing, the CAISO real time market shows the generators at Scotia with a minus LMP. See the screenshot below dated Feb 5. Last screenshot
HRC and HSC have lower timber taxes , Schedule T timber depletions tax write offs and can get CARB credits for not cutting on land that has already been cut while the value increases because a 50 year old redwood is worth much more than a 40 year old tree.
2 Comment 3.
Back in 2017 a group of individuals and the HSU student Climate Action Group requested that we use a local organization to manage power trades (I think it was Sonoma Clean Energy to do the day to day work of buying energy and tracking RECs etc.)
The Energy Authority was chosen . Their fee was 2% of the cost of transactions in my recollection.
I think RCEA should renegotiate a lower rate with TEA. I don’t believe TEA’s cost match the inflation on commodities, labor costs etc. If they have expanded I think their unit cost would go down.
Comment 4.
You can find a list of California CCA’s on line .RCEA is small compared to Marin and Sonoma Clean Energy.
I think that we have to consider requesting a merger with one of these organizations . The economies of scale are real and provide lower unit cost for the rate payer,Regrettably the down side is not being able to talk to a board member when it’s easy for me as an individual; however, most people only care about price.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
Walt Paniak
Arcata
This page
intentionally
left blank.