Idaho Power’s 100 percent clean energy by 2045 goal sounded like a turning point for our region, especially for customers who care about reliability, affordability, and cleaner air. But as new natural gas plants and coal conversions appear in the latest long‑term plans, it raises a bigger question: are we truly modernizing our energy system, or leaning on 1950s‑era solutions while more effective options sit on the sidelines?
Idaho Power’s 20-Year Clean Energy Plan
When Idaho Power first announced its 100 percent clean or carbon‑free goal for 2045, the utility highlighted a future built on hydropower, new wind and solar, and storage. The company has already reduced carbon emissions substantially compared to 2005, largely by moving away from coal and adding more renewables. For customers, “100 percent clean” suggests a steady transition away from fossil fuels and toward resources that don’t commit Idaho to decades of future emissions.
But utility planning always happens on long timelines. A power plant built today is designed to operate 30 years or more, which means decisions made in the 2020s will still affect our grid beyond 2045. That’s why it matters what types of projects get green‑lit now, and it’s why many in our state are watching Idaho Power’s recent moves closely.
Why New Gas Plants Raise Concerns
In its most recent Integrated Resource Plan (IRP), Idaho Power calls for expanding energy resources to meet sharply rising demand in Southern Idaho and Eastern Oregon, including new natural gas capacity and conversions of coal units to burn gas. However, natural gas is still a fossil fuel and emits carbon dioxide at the smokestack — generating pollutants that cause respiratory problems and negatively impact air quality.
It’s also important to note that greenhouse gas emissions from extraction, transport, and combustion, and facilities built today could still be running long after the 2045 clean energy target date.
That creates a tension: customers hear “100 percent clean energy,” yet see plans that keep significant fossil‑fuel infrastructure in place for decades. It also raises financial questions: if stricter carbon rules or cheaper renewable options arrive faster than expected, will customers end up paying to retire or retrofit gas plants early? None of this is to suggest bad motives, but it does underscore how important it is that near‑term investments align with long‑term promises.
The Myth That Solar Can’t Meet Demand
A common talking point in this debate is that “solar can’t keep up with growth, or “solar doesn’t work when it’s cold.” In practice, that’s an oversimplification of how solar is being used, and not a realistic statement as to what it can do.
Today, much of the focus is on large solar farms built on open land, including in desert and agricultural areas. Yet the United States has hundreds of millions of square feet of rooftop space — on homes, warehouses, hospitals, schools, and big‑box retail — that sit largely unused.
Next, consider that peak demand in many parts of the country, including the Mountain West, tends to spike on hot summer afternoons when air conditioners are running hardest. Rooftop and parking‑lot solar producing power right where people are using it can directly reduce stress on the grid during those peak hours.
Cold weather is not the real obstacle either. Solar panels routinely operate in far colder climates than Southern Idaho, from Minnesota to Canada and Northern Europe. Panels actually work quite efficiently in cooler temperatures, as long as they receive sunlight and snow is managed through design and maintenance.
The real challenge during the winter — and it’s one we meet all the time here at EGT — is how to design the system effectively (not whether solar can operate).
Solar is Often Used in the Wrong Places
From our vantage point in the solar industry, one of the biggest missed opportunities is where solar gets installed.
Drive through Boise, Nampa, Meridian, or Twin Falls and look at the rooftops of large box stores, logistics centers, and auto dealerships. Many of those high‑visibility buildings have enormous, flat roofs — but no solar. At the same time, Idaho Power’s long‑range plan anticipates needing thousands of megawatts of new capacity and hundreds of millions of dollars in new infrastructure to keep up with projected growth.
If a meaningful share of those commercial rooftops housed solar panels, the impact on local demand would be significant.
A single building will rarely offset 100 percent of its energy use all year long, but cutting a facility’s load by 30 to 50 percent during key hours is realistic under Idaho Power’s current rules, especially for daytime‑heavy users like retail, medical, and office buildings. That load reduction creates a ripple effect: lower demand at the meter means less need for new gas plants, fewer transmission upgrades, and less pressure to bring older coal assets back into the mix.
It’s a similar story in Treasure Valley neighborhoods. If the majority of homes in a high‑growth area like Southeast Boise had rooftop solar offsetting a portion of their usage, the local grid would see far lower peaks on sunny days. That shift could reduce the need for stand‑alone battery facilities or large solar fields built on farmland, because customers would be generating more power right where they live.
Proven Resources Utilities Are Already Using
Around the country, utilities are already demonstrating that renewable generation, storage, and demand‑side programs can (and do!) support grid reliability at scale. Some examples of these resources include:
- Utility‑scale solar with four‑hour battery storage to handle late‑afternoon and early‑evening peaks.
- Distributed rooftop solar that reduces demand at the distribution level, easing stress on substations and feeders.
- Demand response programs that temporarily adjust large customers’ usage during the most constrained hours.
- Targeted energy efficiency, which lowers overall consumption and lengthens the life of existing infrastructure.
Closer to home, Pacific Power (another regional utility) provides incentive programs that pay customers to install batteries and allow the utility to use that stored energy during peak times. Pacific Power’s Wattsmart Battery Program, for example, provides upfront payments per kilowatt of battery output plus ongoing bill credits, turning customer‑owned batteries into a flexible, shared resource. This is a model of utilities seeing customer‑side investments as part of the solution, not a threat to their business.
Idaho Power’s own IRP acknowledges the need for substantial battery storage and efficiency, alongside renewables, to meet a projected 45 percent increase in peak demand by 2045. The question is how aggressively those options are pursued compared to new fossil‑fuel projects.
Why Commercial Solar Isn’t Further Along
If the benefits are so clear, why aren’t more corporations in Southern Idaho aggressively installing solar on their roofs and parking lots today? Several obstacles come up repeatedly in our conversations with local businesses.
First, capital priorities. Even with strong tax incentives and relatively short payback periods, solar requires a significant upfront investment. Hospitals, manufacturers, and retailers are juggling tight margins, inflation, and an uncertain political climate. Many are cautious about committing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars (sometimes more) when they are unsure what the next few years will bring.
Second, the structure of tax incentives. The federal Investment Tax Credit and related commercial incentives are available through at least the late 2020s, but they compete with a long list of other tax strategies. Large corporations often pay effective tax rates far below the headline rate, and they already benefit from a variety of deductions that have nothing to do with clean energy. Without targeted policies that actively favor on‑site solar and efficiency over other write‑offs, many companies simply follow the status quo.
Third, utility relationships. Large industrial and tech customers sometimes negotiate special rates and infrastructure deals with utilities, especially when they bring major new load to the system. If a corporation can secure lower power prices by promising high, steady usage, the financial incentive to cut that usage with on‑site solar is weaker (even if reducing demand would benefit the broader grid and local ratepayers).
The Role of Policy and Incentives
Policy will play a major role in whether we continue relying on centralized, utility‑owned infrastructure or experience the full potential of solar. Current federal tax credits for solar and storage are still available for businesses, but what happens after those incentives phase down is still uncertain, and that uncertainty can weaken these investments.
Thoughtful policy design could change that. For example, consider the possibilities:
- Shifting corporate tax benefits toward on‑site clean energy, efficiency, and storage, rather than more general deductions.
- Encouraging utilities to structure large‑customer deals around demand reduction and local generation, instead of only energy consumption.
- Scaling programs like Pacific Power’s Wattsmart model in more territories, compensating customers for flexible capacity that helps the grid.
None of these changes would remove the need for careful grid planning or backup resources. But they would enable customers (whether they may be homeowners or big‑box retailers) to move beyond being passive ratepayers and become active participants in solving our energy challenges.
Technology Has Moved On; So Should Our Planning
In almost every area of life, our technology has advanced dramatically in the last few decades. We carry powerful computers in our pockets, complete complex tasks with the help of sophisticated software, and increasingly drive vehicles that need little or no gasoline.
Yet when it comes to how we generate electricity, we are still leaning heavily on technologies and business models that were developed in the middle of the last century.
Natural gas plants and coal conversions may feel familiar from a planning perspective, but they are not the only resources available to us. We now have proven, scalable solutions, including solar, storage, efficiency, and demand response, all of which can work together to build a cleaner, more resilient, and more flexible grid. Continuing to rely on fossil‑fuel infrastructure as the default while these alternatives sit underused is, at the very least, a missed opportunity.
How Customers Can Take a Stand
We recognize that utilities operate in a complex environment of regulations, reliability obligations, and fast‑growing demand. Our intention is not to vilify providers, but to invite a more transparent conversation about what “100 percent clean energy” should look like.
For homeowners, farmers, and businesses, there are practical steps you can take right now:
- Put your roof to work. Even if solar doesn’t cover your entire usage, reducing a meaningful portion of your demand protects you from future rate increases and eases pressure on the grid.
- Ask questions. When you see big infrastructure announcements, ask how they move us closer to (or further from) the 2045 clean energy commitment.
- Support policies that reward demand reduction. Whether it’s local pilot programs or federal incentives, backing efforts that pay customers to help the grid sends a clear signal.
As solar installers, we see daily that everything we need to build a cleaner, more reliable energy system already exists, and the technology at our disposal improves every year.
The question for our region is this: since we’re fully capable of moving beyond 1950s technology, will we choose to use the full set of modern solutions available? From our perspective, “100 percent clean energy by 2045” shouldn’t be just a slogan. It should be the reality that powers our homes, businesses, and communities.
