Polite, addresses the issues in a clear and organized manner, and avoids namecalling. Very professional. Bloodless, but that's the best way to deal with a bureaucracy. People who have to wear suits to work and obey a lot of regulations generally look askance at the wild-eyed. Besides, one can always up the conflict level to confrontation, but it's hard to start there and then back off without looking weak.

Two little suggestions, for the letter: You have nowhere mentioned that the obvious intent is to make alternative energy more of a pain than it's worth, so as to discourage any threat to Xcel's profits. I'm sure the commissioners see this, but it wouldn't be bad to let them know that you, the citizen, also understand this very well. The insertion of a couple of words will suffice:

It especially bothers us that the result, and likely the intent as well, of these new meters is to reduce the return on our investment.

Also, please strengthen this sentence:

In closing, we strongly believe that Docket 04S-164E will have a chilling effect on the growing use of residential and business photovoltaic systems, it is in opposition to the requirements of Amendment 37, it unfairly charges us for changes to our system, and it decreases the value of our investment, and it undermines an important way in which the individual can support the nation's need for energy independence in perilous times.

You need to express that this is how it is, not that there is some difference of opinion, a matter of varying beliefs, that might be fixed through the use of soothing words and possibly the redefinition of a couple of concepts. And don't be hesitant about waving the flag: your point about energy generation is a very important one that will go unrecognized unless you use it. Repeatedly.

After 911, my son and I had an anguished conversation about the events of the day, especially reinforced by the sad coincidence that we had celebrated his first birthday in the restaurant on top of the WTC. He said to me, pointing at the rescue efforts, "This is why they won't win. Look at this. Sure, there was some direction, and the City [New York, meaning City Hall] responded very well, but look at this! Look at all the volunteer efforts, and how they all worked together! We're self-organizing! We work really well when our centers are attacked, because our instincts as a country are decentralized. They won't win. They don't understand this."

Your little solar collector is one more way in which we are decentralized and self-organizing. It's of benefit to you financially, but it also represents planning, investment, and is an expression of the essence of the American spirit of independence.

Use that in your public appeal. The letters to the editor, the website, and so forth, need to hook the public with ideas that non-tekkies can get behind. Link to your tech specs, but don't put them on your home page. Pictures of your house next to pictures of the biggest, ugliest plant that Xcel has would be nice... and make sure you hit the very upscale trendy environmentalists who have ski lodges in the state.

Does your newspaper have a Sunday guest columnist feature? Do any of the other papers in CO? Use it! Not to be too bloody-minded, but you could use maybe only one or two rougher metaphors for what Xcel is trying to do in its pursuit of monopoly. "How can America stand tall when Xcel is ready to slice the Achilles tendon of energy independence here in Colorado?" "Energy independence, still in its infancy, is in danger of being smothered in its cradle by Xcel Energy's Docket 04S-164E." But images like that need to be used sparingly and with care.

Xcel = Goliath. Go ahead, David: pick up a couple of rocks.