Op-Ed: Why Idahoans Are Paying More for Their Power Bills

By David Leavitt • May 22, 2025

The following Op-Ed was submitted by Rep. David Leavitt (R – Twin Falls). Op-Eds to not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of those at the Idaho Dispatch.

Across Idaho, families, farmers, and small business owners are opening their monthly utility bills and doing a double take. Electricity costs are rising, and not just by pennies. For many, it feels like another hit in a season of economic strain. But while the increase is real, the reasons behind it are far more complicated than a spike in temperatures or fuel prices. What’s really happening is that Idaho’s power market is being shaped by forces well beyond our borders—driven by regional energy politics, renewable energy mandates in other states, and federal land management policies that are reshaping the landscape of Idaho itself.

At the heart of the issue is Idaho’s participation in the Western Energy Imbalance Market, or WEIM. This is a multi-state energy trading system run by the California Independent System Operator (CAISO)¹, which allows states in the West to buy and sell electricity in real-time.

On the surface, this sounds practical. It allows for better grid coordination and can reduce waste. But in reality, this system is increasingly used by states like California, Oregon, and Washington to meet their aggressive green energy mandates²—at Idaho’s expense. While those states have enacted strict laws to eliminate fossil fuels and shift to 100% clean energy by 2045, Idaho has no such mandate. Yet our state is building the infrastructure to help them meet theirs.

Because California can’t meet its own energy goals internally, it relies on other states—particularly Idaho—to send it electricity generated from renewable sources like wind and solar. This has led to a boom in green energy development in our state, much of it driven not by local need but by out-of-state demand. Projects like the Lava Ridge Wind Farm³, which proposes placing hundreds of turbines across public lands in southern Idaho, are designed primarily to export energy out of state. These are massive developments—spanning miles of rural land, disrupting ranching operations, wildlife migration paths, and historic sites. And they’re not being driven by Idahoans, but by corporations responding to incentives from other states and federal subsidies.

Supporting these export-driven projects are high-voltage transmission lines and substations, such as the Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP-North) and the Great Basin Substation. These are not minor upgrades—they are industrial-scale projects stretching hundreds of miles and designed specifically to move green energy from Idaho to population centers on the West Coast. The SWIP-North line alone runs approximately 285 miles to connect renewable energy from southern Idaho and Nevada to the broader western grid⁴. This infrastructure exists not to serve Idaho homes and farms, but to funnel electricity to California’s energy-hungry urban centers.

Meanwhile, Idaho’s own utility companies are taking advantage of the green gold rush. Idaho Power, for example, has made major investments in renewable infrastructure—not necessarily to serve Idaho ratepayers, but to sell power to neighboring states that pay a premium for green energy. And because utilities are allowed to recover these costs from their customers, Idaho residents end up footing the bill. The Idaho Public Utilities Commission approved a $50 million rate increase for Idaho Power in 2025, raising the average household bill by $3.50 per month⁵. Rocky Mountain Power has proposed even larger increases, citing rising fuel and infrastructure costs.

Adding even more pressure to the grid are three massive energy-intensive projects now underway in southern Idaho. Micron’s $15 billion semiconductor expansion in Boise is projected to create 2,000 jobs and significantly increase energy demand, with a goal of sourcing 100% renewable power by 2025⁶. In Kuna, Meta is building a nearly one-million-square-foot data center that will become Idaho Power’s single largest energy customer⁷.

Nearby, Diode Ventures—an affiliate of Black & Veatch—is developing the 620-acre Gemstone Technology Park, a multi-building data center complex with strong indications that Google may be involved⁸. These developments are not only driving up electricity demand, but also accelerating the push for more transmission, solar, and wind infrastructure across Idaho.

These increases are layered on top of regulatory mechanisms that ensure utilities get paid, even when customers use less electricity. Programs like the Fixed Cost Adjustment (FCA) and Power Cost Adjustment (PCA) allow companies to shift costs to consumers regardless of usage⁹. That means even when you turn down the thermostat or shut off the lights, your bill might still go up—because the system is designed to protect utility profits first.

And if you’re one of the many Idahoans who invested in residential solar panels, thinking you could reduce your dependence on the grid and maybe even earn credit for the power you produce, the reality has likely been a disappointment. The Idaho Public Utilities Commission (IPUC) has placed a cap on residential solar generation, limiting customers to systems producing no more than 25 kilowatts and capping export credit compensation at 25 megawatt-hours annually¹⁰. Once a customer exceeds that threshold, they are paid significantly less—only a fraction of what they would receive under net metering. At the same time, Idaho Power has proposed reducing the credit rate from over 8 cents per kilowatt-hour to as low as 2.46 cents¹¹.

In contrast, commercial solar farms—many of which export energy out of state—face no such production limits and are compensated under different regulatory structures, often with long-term contracts and utility-scale pricing. This double standard punishes Idaho homeowners who made responsible, forward-thinking investments in renewable energy while rewarding large corporate entities and their developers¹². Instead of empowering individual energy independence, the state’s current policy structure discourages it—leaving families with rising costs, a reduced return on their solar investments, and the sense that the system isn’t built to support them.

All of this is happening with little say from the people who are most affected. In places like Jerome, Minidoka, and Lincoln counties, landowners are watching as public and private lands are being cleared for solar panels and wind farms. Transmission lines are being routed through farm fields and along scenic corridors. Federal land agencies, like the Bureau of Land Management, are fast-tracking approvals for projects that serve national green energy goals, not local needs. And the costs—economic, environmental, and cultural—are being borne by Idaho communities.

It’s easy to paint this as progress, and some certainly profit from it. But for the average Idahoan, especially in our rural counties, it feels more like being steamrolled. We’re being asked to subsidize energy policies we didn’t vote for, and to sacrifice our land, our heritage, and our wallets so California can meet its carbon goals. And while the utilities and developers reap the rewards, the ratepayers—farmers trying to irrigate crops, families running air conditioning in the summer heat, and small businesses managing razor-thin margins—are left holding the bill.

The question Idaho must ask is simple: Who is our energy policy really serving? If we’re going to build the infrastructure, endure the land use impacts, and pay the rising rates, shouldn’t our families and communities be the first to benefit? Until that answer changes, Idahoans will keep seeing higher bills—while someone else gets the