Pro & Con for Big Wind

From Henry Curtis:

SB367 Big Wind (also known as HIREP, Inter-island Cable)

PRO

Windward Ahupua`a Alliance (May 3, 2011): “I support the interisland cable and am glad that it is on the Gov’s short list. If it weren’t so serious, it would be funny that so many so-called environmentalists oppose wind or solar or biofuels while pretending to be solid opponents of fossil fuels. What do you plan to use? Hamsters running on wheels?”

CONCERNS & OPPOSITION

Maui Tomorrow Foundation (April 4, 2011): “Maui Tomorrow Foundation agrees with the statements below from DBEDT Office of Planning and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that alternatives must be explored.”

Ka Lei Maile Alii Hawaiian Civic Club (April 4, 2011): “Ka Lei Maile Alii Hawaiian Civic Club opposes the generation of power on Lanai and Molokai for use by people on Oahu. Our club is located on Oahu. We support the generation of power on Lanai and Molokai for the use of the people who live there.”

KAHEA: The Hawaiian-Environmental Alliance (April 4, 2011): “KAHEA supports renewable energy but opposes SB367.”

Friends of Lanai (April 3, 2011): Energy conservation on O’ahu and throughout our state would get us much closer to our clean energy goals.

 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, Feb 28, 2011): “We recommend analysis of additional alternatives as early as possible”

U.S. Dept of the Interior: Fish and Wildlife Service (Feb 25, 2011): “The NOI [EIS Notice of Intent] does not indicate that an appropriate range of alternatives will be analyzed”

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (Feb 28, 2011): “We advice a precautionary approach”

State of Hawaii’s Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism (DBEDT) Office of Planning (March 1, 2011): “It is necessary for the draft EIS to explore alternatives.”

DLNR State Historic Preservation Division (Feb 23, 2011): “Because this is a programmatic EISPN, it does not include specific information … We believe this approach is problematic.”

Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA, Feb 22, 2011): OHA has strong reservations based on this early phase of the HIREP programmatic plan.”

Maui County (February 28, 2011): In our opinion …resources in the vicinity of Oahu have been arbitrarily excluded”

Historic Hawai`i Foundation (March 3, 2011): “HHP recommends that the EIS include alternatives”

Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation (March 1, 2011): “The EIS must explore reasonable alternatives”

Isaac Davis Hall, Esq. (March 1, 2011): “It is not possible to find that this methodology complies with NEPA [National Environmental Policy Act] or HEPA [Hawai`i Environmental Policy Act]”

Indigenous Consultants, LLC (Mililani B. Trask, Principal): “According to Molokai resident Walter Ritte, the entire Island of Molokai could be energy self-sufficient with 1 windmill but is being forced to accommodate over 100”

American Bird Conservancy, Washington D.C. (March 1, 2011): “Wind power can be an important part of the solution to global warming. …The state of Hawai`i will be a particularly challenging place to develop wind energy because the islands are already the bird extinction capitol of the world.”

Comments(2)

  1. Anonymous says:

    How is it than every time we get a great idea (wind) the Big Energy companies can turn it into something that exploits us?

  2. Karen Chun says:

    The biggest issue is this:

    Given limited money, our residents hurting financially, what is the best use of taxpayer funds to move us to a sustainable energy future?

    The answer, IMO, is to use those same $2billion of taxpayer money to kick in an aggressive program to install first Solar Hot Water on every roof and then either PV on every roof or quiet wind (vertical axis most likely) in every yard.

    This would accomplish the same movement to renewable but the benefits would go directly to the TAXPAYERS and not be siphoned off by big, nonHawai’i energy corporations.

    I think this is why you are seeing so many environmental organizations asking for alternatives.

    A good PACE program (government loans paid back from utility bill savings) coupled with aggressive outreach can use these same government funds in a way that benefits the TAXPAYERS.