Category Archives: Renewable Energy Sources

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.]

Response to Jack Roney’s Response

Richard Ha writes:

Jack Roney wrote an insightful and very well thought-out response to my BICC editorial Cheap Power for Hawaii Island, which ran in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald on April 13th.

We agree with Jack’s point, actually, that reliability should be the first priority of the electric utility. We just come at it in a slightly different way.

The Big Island Community Coalition (BICC) requires that renewable energy options be the best combination of the sustainability’s “triple bottom line:” They must be socially sustainable, environmentally sustainable and economically sustainable.

Presently, what does the best job of meeting the sustainability triple bottom line is the electrical grid. Specifically, it’s the most democratic way to deliver services that we have right now, and therefore it meets the socially sustainable requirement. (This doesn’t preclude something being developed in the future that better serves the sustainability triple bottom line.)

But more Hawaiians live outside of Hawai‘i now than in it, and rising electricity costs are going to cause more and more Hawaiians to leave the state and seek jobs so they are able to support their families. A condition that causes people of the host culture to leave their ancestral lands in greater and greater numbers is not sustainable.

In order for a renewable resource to replace a fossil fuel one, it must perform better on the triple bottom line assessment. It’s not only about the color of the oil – it’s about the cost, and the environmental and social impact of the alternative.

Solar is problematic, as Jack points out, from the standpoint of reliability. And folks who cannot leave the grid will find themselves increasingly paying more for the grid that those who can afford to leave will have left behind. That is not socially sustainable.

Geothermal electricity is by far the lowest cost and it’s available 24/7. It provides the same characteristics as oil but is environmentally friendly, and because of its low cost it’s more socially sustainable than oil. Fewer Hawaiians (and others) will have to leave Hawai‘i. And geothermal’s low stable cost, relative to petroleum oil, will make the Big Island relatively more competitive to the rest of the world regarding electricity. Geothermal satisfies the triple sustainability bottom line.

The PUC gave HELCO a 120-day deadline to explain how their recent 50MW request for geothermal proposals will result in lower costs to the ratepayer, and that deadline is up in a few days. HELCO will need to show a plan that retires oil-fired plants.

The BICC appreciates that the PUC, under Mina Morita’s leadership, has taken a view that ratepayer cost is a top priority. But this is not just a feel-good approach. The triple sustainability bottom line approach is a long term, pono, approach that does the right thing for us as well as future generations. It sets us up to be more competitive to the rest of the world.

Aloha, Jack Roney, for your well thought-out letter to the editor!

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.

My Op-Ed: ‘We Need Cheaper Electricity’

Did you see the op-ed in yesterday’s Honolulu Star-Advertiser? In case you didn’t, this is what I submitted to them:

***

We Need Cheaper Electricity

By Richard Ha

Here is the single most important need facing Hawai‘i today. Everything else radiates from it:

We need cheaper electricity.

It can be done. Recently the Big Island Community Coalition, along with others, helped stop some fairly significant electricity rate hikes from showing up on everybody’s HELCO bills.

And we are very lucky to have resources here, such as geothermal energy, that we can use to generate much cheaper electricity.

Here’s why this is so important:

• We need enough food to eat, and we need to grow it here, instead of relying on it coming to us from somewhere else.

Food security – having enough food to eat, right here where we live – is truly the bottom line. We live in the middle of an ocean, we import more than 80 percent of what we eat, and sometimes there are natural or other disasters and shipping disruptions. This makes a lot of us a little nervous.

• To grow our food here, we need for our farmers to make a decent living: “If the farmers make money, the farmers will farm.”

The price of oil, and of petroleum byproducts like fertilizers and many other farming products, keeps going up, which raises farmers’ costs. They cannot pass on all these higher costs, and they lose money.

We use oil for 70 percent of our electricity here in Hawai‘i, whereas on the mainland they use oil for only 2 percent of theirs—so when the cost of oil increases, anything here that requires electricity to produce is less competitive. And farmers in Hawai‘i also pay four times as much for electricity as do their mainland competition, which puts them at an even bigger competitive disadvantage. Fewer young people are going into farming and this will impact our food security even further.

HELCO needs to be a major driver in reducing the cost of electricity. We believe that HELCO is fully capable of providing us with reliable and less costly electrical power, and ask that the PUC reviews its directives to and agreements with HELCO. Its directives should now be that HELCO’s primary objective should be making significant reductions in the real cost of reliable electric power to Hawai‘i Island residents.

At the same time, we ask that HELCO be given the power to break out of its current planning mode in order to find the most practicable means of achieving this end. We will support a long-range plan that realistically drives down our prices to ensure the viability of our local businesses and the survivability of our families. All considerations should be on the table, including power sources (i.e., oil, natural gas, geothermal, solar, biomass, etc.), changes in transmission policy including standby charges, and retaining currently operating power plants.

This is not “us” vs. “them.” We are all responsible for creating the political will to get it done.

Rising electricity costs act like a giant regressive tax: the people on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder get hurt first, and hardest. If our energy costs are lower – and we can absolutely make that happen – our farmers can keep their prices down, food will be cheaper, and consumers will have more money left over at the end of the month. This is good for our people, and for our economy.

We have good resources here and we need to maximize them. Geothermal and other options for cheaper for energy. We also have the University of Hawai‘i, the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, the Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center and others that help our farmers.

To learn more about achieving cheaper electricity rates, consider joining the Big Island Community Coalition (bigislandcommunitycoalition.com; there’s no cost). We send out an occasional email with information on what we’re doing to get electricity costs down, and how people can help.

Remember the bottom line: every one of us needs to call for cheaper electricity, and this will directly and positively impact our food security.

Richard Ha is a farmer on the Big Island’s Hamakua coast, a member of the state’s Board of Agriculture, and chairman of the Big Island Community Coalition.

***

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.

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.

Iceland & Hydrogen Fuel

Richard Ha writes:

This is a video about Iceland's hydrogen project.

 

Now that fleets of fuel cell vehicles are being readied for roll out, Iceland is prepared and ready to get off petroleum for its land and sea transportation.

We can do the same with our curtailed – thrown away! – wind, geothermal and solar power.

I took these photos, posted on their hydrogen refueling station wall, in Iceland in 2011. They give a good, easy-to-read overview.

1. Iceland hydrogen refueling station

Bamboo hydro 006

Bamboo hydro 006

Bamboo hydro 006

Bamboo hydro 006

Good News: PUC Says No To AKP Biofuels

Richard Ha writes:

Happy holidays, everyone!

We received good news on Monday: The PUC rejected the ‘Aina Koa Pono biofuel project.

From Civil Beat:

The Public Utilities Commission has rejected a proposal to build a biofuels facility in Kau on the Big Island. 

The developer, Aina Koa Pono, hoped to use plant feedstocks to produce drop-in biofuel for the electric utilities on the Big Island, Maui and Oahu. But the PUC said that the fuel would be too expensive, in a decision issued on Monday.

“The contract price for the AKP-produced biofuel is excessive and not cost-effective at present and for the foreseeable future, and thus, is unreasonable and inconsistent with the public interest,” commissioners wrote…. Read the rest

It goes to show that “we, the people” can make a difference.

In this case, a grassroots group of folks came together spontaneously to advocate for low-cost electricity on behalf of the rubbah slippah folks on the Big Island. We called ourselves the Big Island Community Coalition (BICC).

We supported other community members by submitting written testimony, and helped organize public participation at two PUC hearings on the Big Island. Here’s a post about it from last year.

The people involved in the BICC were Dave DeLuz, Jr., John Dill, Rockne Freitas, Michelle Galimba, Richard Ha, Wallace Ishibashi, Kuulei Kealoha Cooper, Robert Lindsey, H.M. Monty Richards, Marcia Sakai, Kumu Lehua Veincent and William Walter.

Helping the rubbah slippah folks helps all of us.

‘La La La La La’

Richard Ha writes:

Farmers and other Ag and business people on the Big Island are in disbelief – to put it mildly – that Mayor Kenoi signed Bill 113, the anti-GMO bill, last week, without first putting together a group to research the science and investigate the serious, unintended consequences we know will result.

But farmers are very practical and play the position that exists on the chessboard, not the position they wish they had. Most of us are moving into strategic contraction mode now.

For example, we had an application in to the USDA to dedicate 264 acres of our farm into agricultural land for perpetuity. We had been going through the vetting process over the last two years and had already been told we were among the top three state projects, as determined by a Department of Land and Natural Resources subcommittee.

I just received a letter Friday asking for more information about our application, with a comment from the Western Region director stating that our project had the highest priority.

I wrote back saying we are withdrawing our application. Nothing personal; just playing the position that now exists. Instead, we will subdivide the property so we have options as we go forward into a future that has some new uncertainties.

If there’s an upside to the mayor signing the bill, it’s that maybe now we will finally take a real look at the current Peak Oil crisis and how it affects the Big Island’s food self-sufficiency situation, and come to grips with finding long-term solutions.

Being open to safe scientific advances when needed (a.k.a. biotech or “GMO”) would have been a way to decrease our dependence on petroleum products, such as pesticides and fertilizers, and increase our island’s food self-sufficiency.

Geothermal energy is another no-brainer that will protect us from rising energy costs. Utilizing geothermal energy – which according to geophysicists will be available to us for at least 500,000 years – we can have stable electricity at an affordable price. As another benefit of geothermal, we can take the currently “curtailed” (collected but unused) electricity and make hydrogen for ground transportation; and by combining it with nitrogen in the air, we can make fertilizer that doesn’t depend on petroleum products and continue to get more and more expensive.

But Senator Ruderman doesn’t see this and wants to kill geothermal energy.

Why? Where is he steering our ship? It feels rudderless.

These are turbulent times. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan was on CNN yesterday saying that despite dumping money into the economy, businesses are sitting on a lot of cash and not investing, and banks are not lending because it’s too risky. 

He said that the level of uncertainty is like it was during the Great Depression. The next Fed chair will have to manage the interest rate, and too high an interest rate will roil the stock market. He said, “It’s hard to manage psychology.”

I do not see people paying attention to this, so let me extrapolate from what he’s saying: As a result, regular folk are not earning as much money. As a consequence of that, the government will not be able to tax people at a level needed to keep services going, such as maintaining roads (which, of course, requires products made from petroleum).

How far will this go on before we can no long maintain our infrastructure the way we are accustomed to, or take care of our poor people who need help?

What Alan Greenspan is talking about is serious business, and he’s certainly not the only person saying it.

This all boils down to the cost of energy, and how we utilize our resources in a smart and efficient manner.

I’ve gone to five Peak Oil conferences now, and have learned that experts there are all, consistently, saying that the net energy available to society is decreasing as it gets more difficult to get the energy. The consequence of this is less growth, which means less money for the government to perform the services we need to continue living the way we live. Where will the money come from?

Another expert who is highly respected is actury Gail Tverberg. She is as credible as anyone I’ve heard, and she too says it all boils down to the cost of energy. Not availability, nor how much oil still exists, but how much it costs to obtain it – and we all know those costs are only going higher. She writes

Oil and other fossil fuels are unusual materials. Historically, their value to society has been far higher than their cost of extraction. It is the difference between the value to society and their cost of extraction that has helped economies around the world grow. Now, as the cost of oil extraction rises, we see this difference shrinking. As this difference shrinks, the ability of economies to grow is eroding, especially for those countries that depend most heavily on oil–Japan, Europe, and the United States. It should not be surprising if the growth of these countries slows as oil prices rise…. Read the rest

Using GMOs to help leverage our year-round growing season was a workaround, and in my opinion, it was much less risky than what Alan Greenspan, Gail Tverberg and other experts say is coming.

We need to take action and prepare for these changing conditions. If it turns out they were wrong, no harm/no foul. If they are right, using GMO's to avoid petroleum costs in fertilizer and pesticides would have helped us immensely; and using geothermal energy will improve our lifestyle measurably.

Note that I’m not just talking about this – the whole situation scared me enough that we went and put in a hydroelectric system for the farm.

This is not about the sky falling. It’s about common sense. It’s all a matter of how much risk we are willing to take.

We need to decrease our dependence on petroleum, and our energy costs. Rising electricity costs affect the price of our food, and they take away discretionary income from the rubbah slippah folks. Consumer spending makes up two-thirds of our economy.

It’s foolish for us to put our thumbs in our ears and our fingers over our eyes and sing, “La la la la la,” but that’s what seems to be going on around here. 

We’d better have a clear-headed discussion about our future.