Tag Archives: Peak Oil

A Real Danger: The Rising Cost of Food

Richard Ha writes:

The rising cost of food is a real and present danger.

  • Last month the price of meat in the U.S. rose at the fastest rate in ten years.
  • The cost of shrimp is up 61 percent from a year ago.
  • It’s predicted that pork production may be down ten percent this year, due to a widespread virus, and the cost is already up 13 percent this year.
  • As all these costs go up, many people have turned to eating chicken, but even the price of chicken breast is up 12 percent since a year ago.

Right here on the Big Island, our Pahoa school complex has the highest percentage of students in the entire state participating in the free/subsidized school lunch program. EIGHTY-NINE percent of the students in the Pahoa school complex qualify for, and receive, free or subsidized lunches.

There are socioeconomic consequences to all of this, and it’s exactly why the Big Island Community Coalition is advocating so strongly for lower electricity prices, which will directly lead to lower food costs.

From peakoil.com:

As the price of meat continues to skyrocket, will it soon be considered a “luxury item” for most American families?  This week we learned that the price of meat in the United States rose at the fastest pace in more than 10 years last month….

The price of beef has also moved to unprecedented heights.  Thanks to the crippling drought that never seems to end in the western half of the nation, the size of the U.S. cattle herd has been declining for seven years in a row, and it is now the smallest that is has been since 1951….

And we already have tens of millions of people in this country that are struggling to feed themselves.  If you doubt this, please see my previous article entitled “Epidemic Of Hunger: New Report Says 49 Million Americans Are Dealing With Food Insecurity.”

So what happens if drought, diseases and plagues continue to cause food production in this country to plummet?

Read the rest

‘Behind the Plug & Beyond the Barrel’

Richard Ha writes:

I spoke on behalf of the Big Island Community Coalition (BICC) at the Hawai‘i Island Renewable Energy Solutions Summit 2014 on April 30th, which was titled “Behind the Plug and Beyond the Barrel," and here's what I said: 

BICC mission

Good morning. Thanks for the introduction. I will use just this one slide, and you can read our mission statement on it, which is to lower the cost of electricity. “To make Big Island electricity rates the lowest in the state by emphasizing the use of local resources.”

I would like to spend some time talking about who makes up the BICC.

Dave DeLuz, Jr. – President of Big Island Toyota.

John Dill – Contractors Association, and Chair of the Ethics Commission

Rockne Freitas – Former Chancellor Hawai‘i Community College

Michelle Galimba – Rancher, Board of Agriculture

Richard Ha – Farmer

Wallace Ishibashi – Royal Order of Kamehameha, DHHL Commissioner

Kuulei Kealoha Cooper- Trustee, Jimmy Kealoha and Miulan Kealoha Trust.

Noe Kalipi – Former staffer for Sen Akaka, helped write the Akaka Bill, energy consultant

Kai'u Kimura- Executive Director of ‘Imiloa.

Bobby Lindsey – OHA Trustee

Monty Richards – Kahua Ranch

Marcia Sakai – Vice Chancellor for Administrative Affairs, former Dean of UH Hilo, College of Business

Bill Walter- President of Shipman, Ltd., which is the largest landowner in Puna.

These folks are all operating in their private capacities. I'm chair of the BICC, and the only person from Hawai‘i to have attended five Peak Oil conferences. I've visited Iceland and the Philippines with Mayor Kenoi's exploratory group.

As you can imagine, the BICC has strong support all across political parties and socioeconomic strata. People get it in five minutes.

Oil and gas are finite resources, and prices will rise.  One note about natural gas: the decline rate of the average gas well is very high. Ninety percent of the production comes out in five years. This is worrisome.

Hawai‘i Island relies on oil for sixty percent of its electricity generation; the U.S. mainland only two percent.

As the price of oil rises, our food manufacturers and producers become less competitive, as we all know. Food security involves farmers farming. And if the farmers make money, the farmers will farm.

What can we do?  By driving the cost of electricity down, the Big Island can have a competitive edge to the rest of the world.

Since rising electricity rates act like a giant regressive tax, lowering electricity rates would do just the opposite. And since two-thirds of the economy is made up of consumer spending, this would be like "trickle up" economics. If the rubbah slippah folks had extra money, they would spend and everyone would benefit.

 The lowest-hanging fruit:

1. Geothermal. Allows us to dodge the finite resource bullet. It is the lowest-cost base power. The Big Island will be over the hot spot for 500,000 to a million years.

2. We throw away many lots of MW of electricity every night. Hu Honua will probably throw away 10 MW for ten hours every night. PGV, maybe 7 MW for ten hours.

3. Wind, too.

Maybe HELCO will allow us to move the excess electricity free. They don't make any money on the throwaway power now, anyway. What if we used it for something that won't compete with them? Then people could bid for the excess, throwaway power for hydrogen fueling stations, to make ammonia fertilizer, and to attract data centers. Hawaii could become the renewable energy capital of the world. People would love to come here and look at that. As airline ticket costs rise, the walk around cost in Hawai‘i would not.

The BICC call for lowering electricity costs could leave future generations a better Hawai‘i.  And that is what we all want.

Check Out the Big Island Community Coalition

Richard Ha writes:

I'm going to be speaking this week on behalf of the Big Island Community Coalition (BICC).

Our mission is to "Make Big Island electricity rates the lowest in the state by emphasizing the use of local resources." 

Have you checked out our website? (Click photo to enlarge.)

BICC site

Join us at BICC – it's as easy as giving us your contact info – and we will keep you in the loop; we'll let you know what we are doing and also how you can help.  

I'll tell you a bit more about this later in the week.

‘Triple Bottom Line’ Approach to Renewable Energy

Richard Ha writes:

We need a “triple bottom line” approach to renewable energy options. They need to be socially sustainable, environmentally sustainable, and economically sustainable.

World-renowned economist, Nobel laureate, and New York Times best-selling author Joseph Stiglitz spoke on this at UH Manoa. His lecture, “Where long-term and short-term goals converge: Using sustainability as an impetus for economic growth,” starts at the 21:30 mark of this video.

Social sustainability has largely been ignored in many approaches to renewable energy solutions. The Big Island has the lowest median family income in the state, and that is not socially sustainable. Hawaiians leaving their ancestral lands in greater and greater numbers in order to look for work is not socially sustainable.

We need to pay more attention to this. Finding solutions that give folks on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder more spending money will benefit all of us, because two-thirds of our economy is made up of consumer spending.

Energy and agriculture are inextricably tied together, and the agricultural industry is vulnerable because of its dependency on energy. Nitrogen fertilizer, plastics, chemicals, etc., are all byproducts of petroleum.

What can we do to dodge the bullet? We can maximize the resources we have available to us here in a sustainable way.

On the energy side, we have geothermal, which will be available to us, according to the scientists, for 500,000 years. On the ag side, we have a year-long growing season. These are both huge advantages. We need to leverage them so we have a competitive advantage over the rest of the world.

Geothermal electricity puts us on the right side of the cost curve. And as natural gas prices rise, we will be able to competitively make hydrogen. We can use that hydrogen for transportation, as well as to manufacture nitrogen fertilizer.

In the ag industry, we should be maximizing technology to help us with disease and insect control, thereby lessening our dependency on natural gas.

Our tourism industry is also at risk as jet fuel rises in cost. But with the same low-cost electricity that helps our farmers and their customers, we would lower the walk-around cost of the average tourist’s budget. This would both support our tourism industry and bring money into our local economy.

From Peak Oil News:

GEOG Researchers Address Economic Dangers of ‘Peak Oil’

Researchers from the University of Maryland and a leading university in Spain demonstrate in a new study which sectors could put the entire U.S. economy at risk when global oil production peaks (“Peak Oil”). This multi-disciplinary team recommends immediate action by government, private and commercial sectors to reduce the vulnerability of these sectors.

Read the rest

In the final analysis, we can no longer think and act in silence. We need a long-range systems approach, based on the three pillars of sustainability – social sustainability, environmental sustainability, and economic sustainability.

If you’d like to know more, sign up at the Big Island Community Coalition and we’ll send you an occasional email letting you know what we’re doing and how you can help.

[The link is not working from this blog, though the BICC website is up. Please go to www.bigislandcommunitycoalition.com.]

Natural Gas Inventory Unexpectedly Low, Futures High

Richard Ha writes:

From the Wall Street Journal on Thursday, some concern over the price and availability of natural gas:

Natural Gas Makes Biggest Gain in Two Months

Concern Over Low Stockpile Lifts Market

By Timothy Puko

Natural-gas prices on Thursday posted their biggest one-day gain in two months after a smaller-than-expected increase in U.S. inventories reignited fears that supplies are too low.

Producers added 24 billion cubic feet to stockpiles in the week ended April 11, less than the 34 billion cubic feet average forecast by analysts and traders in a Wall Street Journal survey. Gas supplies are coming off an 11-year-low after a frigid winter boosted demand to burn it for home heating…. Read the rest

The big picture is this: natural gas is pumped underground during the summer, when production is high, and then pulled out of the ground and used in the winters. Because this past winter on the mainland was exceptionally cold, natural gas stores were drawn down much more than is normal or was anticipated.

Now that we’re in the season when we pump natural gas back into storage, there might not be enough to take care of next winter without the price escalating significantly.

The Wall Street Journal article above notes a spike in natural gas futures as people realize that not much gas is going back into underground storage to compensate for this past cold spell. Stock traders are saying, “Holy smoke!”

This is one of the reasons I’m pushing so hard for geothermal – so that we can get off this treadmill.

I was just talking to Robert Rapier, who is saying the same thing. He said that a mild winter might not have caused this mid-$4/1000 cubic feet price to seem normal. He wrote about this last month at Energy Trends Insider:

Gas Inventories Reach 11-Year Low

By Robert Rapier on March 13, 2014 with 7 responses 

Natural Gas Update

Two weeks ago I wrote about the abnormal situation with natural gas inventories in Natural Gas Inventories are Headed Toward Zero. I got a number of questions and comments about that essay, and since then we now have another two weeks of inventory data, let’s update the picture….Read the rest

The question people are asking now is: What happens if we cannot refill the underground natural gas storage fast enough, and before winter rolls around again. And what if it happens to be exceptionally cold again?

Stay tuned.

Paniolo Power in Waimea

Richard Ha writes:

I went to a talk in Waimea last night, and it's just exactly what the Big Island Community Coalition (BICC) is talking about.

Parker Ranch CEO Dutch Kuyper was talking about the new venture Paniolo Power. From the website:

During 2013, Parker Ranch embarked on a comprehensive integrated resource planning effort to explore the possibility of reducing the cost of electricity for the Waimea community.

Parker Ranch lands are endowed with significant potential energy resources. These resources include wind, solar, biomass and, possibly, geothermal.

Parker Ranch commenced a utility-grade resource planning effort to explore whether a compelling alternative strategy could be both economically and technically feasible as compared to the resource plans produced by the incumbent utility.

The management team prioritized the study of whether a “community micro grid” could benefit the residents and businesses of Waimea – the hometown of Parker Ranch.

This website will provide information and perspective on our energy planning efforts. At present, our efforts continue in the research phase. At each stage of our progress, we will report our findings on www.paniolopower.com.

We will also be meeting with our community on a periodic basis to engage our friends and neighbors to help everyone understand the purpose of our efforts.

We look forward to sharing our efforts with you in the future.

Aloha and mahalo,

Paniolo Power Company, LLC

This is exactly the kind of thing that the BICC is interested in. This will benefit the whole community in Waimea. It's about all of us; not just a few of us.

You can read/follow the BICC blog here.

‘Food Prices Soar as Incomes Stand Still’

Richard Ha writes:

Look at this article about what's going on with food producers in California, where they are having a devastating drought.

It is a good reminder that food security is our number one job. We need the help of all our Hawai‘i food producers to keep us food secure here, and we need to work together and support each other in the spirit of aloha. 

We need to recognize that ag and energy, without a shadow of a doubt, are inextricably tied together. 

In its simplest form, sustainability is about cost. We need to choose the lowest cost solution for our energy, which will keep our ag industry going, which will keep the food available and affordable. We need to choose the lowest cost solution because it will take care of all of us.

From Peakoil.com:

15 Reasons Why Your Food Prices Are About To Start Soaring

Did you know that the U.S. state that produces the most vegetables is going through the worst drought it has ever experienced and that the size of the total U.S. cattle herd is now the smallest that it has been since 1951?  Just the other day, a CBS News article boldly declared that “food prices soar as incomes stand still“, but the truth is that this is only just the beginning.  If the drought that has been devastating farmers and ranchers out west continues, we are going to see prices for meat, fruits and vegetables soar into the stratosphere.  Already, the federal government has declared portions of 11 states to be “disaster areas”, and California farmers are going to leave half a million acres sitting idle this year because of the extremely dry conditions.

Sadly, experts are telling us that things are probably going to get worse before they get better (if they ever do).  As you will read about below, one expert recently told National Geographic that throughout history it has been quite common for that region of North America to experience severe droughts that last for decades.  In fact, one drought actually lasted for about 200 years.  So there is the possibility that the drought that has begun in the state of California may not end during your entire lifetime….

Read the rest

Hawaii: A Microcosm Of The 1914 World

Richard Ha writes:

Christine Lagarde, director of the International Monetary Fund, just gave a very significant speech about where the world is at right now, and—very interesting—how similar it is to where the world was at exactly one hundred years ago, in 1914.

I was struck by how, right now, right here in Hawai‘i, we are a microcosm of what was happening in the world a hundred years ago.

From Christine Lagarde’s speech:

I invite you to cast your minds back to the early months of 1914, exactly a century ago. Much of the world had enjoyed long years of peace, and giant leaps in scientific and technological innovation had led to path-breaking advances in living standards and communications. There were few barriers to trade, travel, or the movement of capital. The future was full of potential.

Yet, 1914 was the gateway to thirty years of disaster—marked by two world wars and the Great Depression. It was the year when everything started to go wrong. What happened?

What happened was that the birth of the modern industrial society brought about massive dislocation. The world was rife with tension—rivalry between nations, upsetting the traditional balance of power, and inequality between the haves and have-nots, whether in the form of colonialism or the sunken prospects of the uneducated working classes.

By 1914, these imbalances had toppled over into outright conflict. In the years to follow, nationalist and ideological thinking led to an unprecedented denigration of human dignity. Technology, instead of uplifting the human spirit, was deployed for destruction and terror. Early attempts at international cooperation, such as the League of Nations, fell flat. By the end of the Second World War, large parts of the world lay in ruins.

Right now, in 2014, we are heading into difficult times, which in fact have already started. We already see how the skyrocketing price of oil has impacted all our costs. Everything is, noticeably, much more expensive: electricity, plane tickets, gasoline, retail goods that have to be transported here, food that needs fertilizer and has to be cooled enroute here. Everything—and it’s only going up.

The story of 1914 is the story of what’s happening in Hawai‘i right now. We have serious divisions, and people yelling at each other about important issues. I don’t see people trying to come together to solve the many problems we are facing. Are we going to go the same way?

They’re doing it right in Iceland. A few years ago, Iceland had the biggest financial meltdown in history, and they’ve turned it around very successfully. They looked at their resources, and used them very well. It’s working.

We are not doing this. Right now, everyone is running around trying to force solutions that benefit themselves. But individual solutions aren’t going to work. We need a big picture solution. We have to come together to seek answers for all of us.

As in Iceland, what we have going for us here is our geothermal potential. I’ve said this so many times now that it sounds like I have an agenda, but I don’t. I don’t gain anything from our increased use of geothermal energy except for what we all will gain: stable energy costs, stable food costs, stable everything costs. The ability to better afford living in Hawai‘i. The pleasure of knowing our kids and grandkids will be able to afford to stay and establish their career and family here, instead of taking off for a cheaper location on the mainland.

An increased use of our geothermal resource will make a big difference in the quality of our lifestyle.

Some people say solar energy is the answer, but that’s not it. Hawai‘i had the highest number of solar installations ever last year. Twenty years from now, when those people have to put on a new roof and redo the solar panels, what will the economy look like then? If oil spikes, they might not have the financing to pay for it. Will they be able to afford it?

The geothermal plant I toured in Iceland could last 60 years. My hydroelectric pipe will last 100 years. Solar is a temporary answer, and maybe it’s a bridge, but it’s not the solution.

Back to Lagarde: What happened to end those 30 years of war and economic disaster was that in 1944, leading economists from around the world came together in New Hampshire.

In her speech, Christine Lagarde said:

The 44 nations gathering at Bretton Woods were determined to set a new course—based on mutual trust and cooperation, on the principle that peace and prosperity flow from the font of cooperation, on the belief that the broad global interest trumps narrow self-interest.

This was the original multilateral moment—70 years ago. It gave birth to the United Nations, the World Bank, and the IMF—the institution that I am proud to lead.

The world we inherited was forged by these visionary gentlemen—Lord Keynes and his generation. They raised the phoenix of peace and prosperity from the ashes of anguish and antagonism. We owe them a huge debt of gratitude.

Because of their work, we have seen unprecedented economic and financial stability over the past seven decades. We have seen diseases eradicated, conflict diminished, child mortality reduced, life expectancy increased, and hundreds of millions lifted out of poverty.

Now, in 2014, which direction are we going to take? The path they went down in 1914, which led to crisis and disaster? Or the 1944 coming together, which changed the disastrous path they/we were on, and from which we are still benefitting?

Let’s not go through 30 or more years of crisis and disaster. Let’s learn from the past, and from what others are doing around us. Let’s all pull together and think on a bigger scale.

Lagarde’s speech was titled, “A New Multilateralism for the 21st Century: the Richard Dimbleby Lecture.” You can read it here. Or watch the video here.

A Big Picture Look

Richard Ha writes:

Yesterday I sat in Judge Nakamura’s courtroom full of people both for and against the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) being built on Mauna Kea. I looked over at Kealoha Pisciotta, who has led the opposition all these years, and thought about how much I admire her.

As I sat there, I thought back to 2008, when rising oil prices started being such a big concern. At the top of my mind then was finding an economic alternative to tourism and opportunities for keiki education, both of which the TMT will provide. Locating the TMT here is a great opportunity, and I put a lot of effort into supporting it.

As I sat there yesterday, I thought, too, about how the TMT will help the Big Island cope with our rising energy costs and changing economy; because of it, money will flow into our economy instead of out. It will bring 10 years of construction jobs, and $1 million/year toward Big Island student education for each of more than 55 years. More importantly, it will bring to the Big Island an attitude of “Not, No Can. CAN!”

In 2007, I’d met Gail Tverberg at my first Peak Oil conference in Houston. A former insurance actuary whose job was to price insurance risk, she is someone who approaches the world oil supply problem from a risk management perspective. I helped bring her to the Big Island to give presentations, and she observed that our dependence on tourism makes Hawai‘i very vulnerable.

In 2008, shale and gas production hadn’t yet started in earnest. Natural gas prices were very high at $12/thousand cubic feet. According to a USDA analysis, there was an 80 percent correlation of natural gas price to ammonia fertilizer cost, and that had a frightening effect on local farmers. The price of natural gas dropped to $2/mcf, and now it’s around $4.50/mcf. This, coupled with a subsequent increase in natural gas supply, has given us some breathing room. But it’s only temporary.

We have another fairly unique opportunity to protect ourselves against seriously rising energy costs, which are already impacting our lives negatively and will continue to go up if we don’t make changes:

Geothermal energy.

After having attended five Association for the Study conferences (the only person from our state to do so) I’ve found that it’s all a matter of 1) cost, 2) what works and 3) comparative risk.

Geothermal addresses all three of those points. It’s inexpensive compared to using oil to produce our energy; we already know that it works; and after decades of experience with it here, the comparative risk is low.

It also allows the possibility of making hydrogen, which we can use to fuel our ground transportation, and also ammonia fertilizer for farmers. There are a lot of wins there.

NYT Article: ‘Lonely Quest for Facts on GM Crops’

Richard Ha writes:

The New York Times just ran an excellent, balanced and well-received article on Hawai‘i Island’s recent GMO ban. It was written by Amy Harmon, a national correspondent for the Times who covers the impact of science and technology on American life. She’s won two Pulitzer Prizes for her work.

A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops

By AMY HARMON

KONA, Hawaii — From the moment the bill to ban genetically engineered crops on the island of Hawaii was introduced in May 2013, it garnered more vocal support than any the County Council here had ever considered, even the perennially popular bids to decriminalize marijuana.

Public hearings were dominated by recitations of the ills often attributed to genetically modified organisms, or G.M.O.s: cancer in rats, a rise in childhood allergies, out-of-control superweeds, genetic contamination, overuse of pesticides, the disappearance of butterflies and bees.

Like some others on the nine-member Council, Greggor Ilagan was not even sure at the outset of the debate exactly what genetically modified organisms were: living things whose DNA has been altered, often with the addition of a gene from a distant species, to produce a desired trait. But he could see why almost all of his colleagues had been persuaded of the virtue of turning the island into what the bill’s proponents called a “G.M.O.-free oasis.”

“You just type ‘G.M.O.’ and everything you see is negative,” he told his staff. Opposing the ban also seemed likely to ruin anyone’s re-election prospects.

Yet doubts nagged at the councilman, who was serving his first two-year term. The island’s papaya farmers said that an engineered variety had saved their fruit from a devastating disease. A study reporting that a diet of G.M.O. corn caused tumors in rats, mentioned often by the ban’s supporters, turned out to have been thoroughly debunked.

And University of Hawaii biologists urged the Council to consider the global scientific consensus, which holds that existing genetically engineered crops are no riskier than others, and have provided some tangible benefits.

“Are we going to just ignore them?” Mr. Ilagan wondered.

Urged on by Margaret Wille, the ban’s sponsor, who spoke passionately of the need to “act before it’s too late,” the Council declined to form a task force to look into such questions before its November vote. But Mr. Ilagan, 27, sought answers on his own. In the process, he found himself, like so many public and business leaders worldwide, wrestling with a subject in which popular beliefs often do not reflect scientific evidence…. Read the rest

Hawai‘i County Councilperson Margaret Wille, though, refers to this article as “Hogwash!”

She’s the local councilperson who spearheaded the Big Island biotech ban, and her comment on the New York Times article kind of says it all. In her second-to-last paragraph she lumps farmers in with “GMO apologists,” which makes us the enemy. We are not the enemy.

Her comment follows the New York Times article:

Margaret Wille

Hawaii Island Hawaii

The underlying message in this article is that pro-GMO is pro-science and those opposed are anti-science. Hogwash! It is the biotech corporations that politically obtained the USDA “political” exemption from being required to do premarketing health and safety tests. This political decision was based on the claim that GMO crops are “substantially equivalent” to the corresponding non-GMO crops. Instead of government required health and safety testing, uncontrolled “open field” testing is occurring right here in Hawaii on Kauai– where all the evidence points to immune disruption of the young and unborn , as well as harm to the soil and adjacent aquatic life.. At the same time these same corporations obtain patent rights based on the distinction of their GMOs, allowing the intellectual property laws to function as the barrier to obtaining the information independent scientist needed to do long term studies.

And whenever an independent study is underway, the GMO offensive position is to discredit the scientist or buy out the organization, as occurred in the case of the international organization doing studies on the adverse affects of associated pesticides on bee populations.

The bottom line is that we passed Bill 113 despite all the opposition from Big Ag GMO proponents and their on island mouthpieces.

Hopefully in the future, the New York Times will curb its biased approach to coverage of GMO related issues. 

Contrast Councilperson Wille with Councilperson Ilagan. What a difference.

At this point, it’s really not a matter of who can yell the loudest, but of sitting down and deciding where we want to end up, and how we’re going to get there. We have a very serious food security issue (I’ll be writing more about this next time) that, with our Peak Oil situation, is only likely to get worse.

We are not looking at a First Amendment situation here, where everyone’s opinion matters. Everyone is welcome to his or her opinion, but at this point, when it comes to making important policy for our people and our food security, we need to sit down and form the best policy we can, using the best science.

What was not covered in the New York Times article was Big Island farmers’ concern that the ban on biotech solutions only applies to Big Island farmers, and not their competitors on other islands or on the mainland.

The president of the Hawaii Papaya Industry Association asked why only papaya farmers are beng required to register their crops and pesticide usage. He said that papaya farmers feel like they are being treated like sex offenders.

And why is there a blanket ban on open air testing? With bananas, flying pollen makes no difference, because they don’t have seeds.

Fusarium wilt killed off the mai‘a maoli as well as the mai‘a popoulu, two banana plants that came to Hawai‘i on the canoes. What if we could bring them back?

What if a virus threatens to kill off all our taro? Would we want to be able to try and save it? What would the ancient ones do?