U.S. REPRESENTATIVE DIST. II CANDIDATES:
Joe Akana – NO RESPONSE
Steven R. Bond – Aloha, I am not in favor of this bioenegy plant.
Ron Burrus – From what I can determine from what I have read, the residents of the community seem to favor the PUC’s decision and cite multiple claims of political corruption and I tend to lean to their side of the argument. They also claim they never wanted the power plant there as well, so I would have to back the residents of the area in this situation. The loss of jobs is always the old and tired reason that it is okay to pollute and do what we want to the environment and the citizens be damned! The thing is, I have lost several jobs as the result of Wall St. take overs and government forced divestitures. My father lost his entire career due to Ronald Reagan’s shut down of health planning organization called Council of Governments. We had to find other jobs, but in some places that is easier to do than in other places. I am sensitive to the fact that Hawaii does not have a lot of available jobs and we need to diversify the economy as much as we can, to give dispalced workes other opportunites to earn a livelyhood. What I would support as your Congressional representative is a jobs training program to help displaced workers. We need to train folks to work on alternative energy projects, perhaps solar panel installation, etc.
David N. Cornejo – NO RESPONSE
Brian Evans – I support all forms of alternative energy and the honua plant would create both abundant jobs and energy and if elected I will support and get federal funding for more clean energy initiatives for Hawaii to lower the cost of utilities and increase local employment.
Emma Jane Avila Fabeck – NO RESPONSE
Noelle Famera – NO RESPONSE
John (Raghu) Giuffre – The American Shopping Party works from a relatively simple policy platform. It’s called ROOPA: Responsibility for One’s Own Products & Actions.
Simply stated, we request biz as well as people to cover the full social costs of their products and actions upon all 3rd parties impacted by them.
It is our initial assessment that the actual true costs of all the environmental and community harm of the project in its present form would leave the project proving significantly too expensive to be of any market relevance as an alternative energy source to the present supply. It would take a more in-depth study to confirm this, but that is the initial response to the project we hold at this time.
Karla (Bart) Gottschalk – Thank you. I was unfamiliar with the extent of the problem. I am a scientist and the ecology is not something to play with for political purposes.I do not Understand the “environmentalists” except that they Use their opinions as scientific facts.Using Eucalyptus as fuel is asinine. Surely we can give up coal eventually but this is not the way. My experience is to move to personal solar and wind with a gas generator. In time I hope to no longer need the gas but for emergencies. I oppose the crony environmentalism that would endanger our ecology, Honu and Lumu, my favorite ocean sald with much respect to those who taught me how to collect it in the early morning shore and surf.
Jonathan Hoomanawamui – The question reveals that PUC denied HELCO from bidding. Hopefully Hu Honua has filters in place to prevent emissions from skyrocketing, which is a contributing factor to Global Warming. HELCO believes that they could do a better job utilizing solar companies and cutting cost. If this is so, why would PUC deny HELCO from bidding?
First of all, HELCO needs to fix their own issues, before involving themselves into other companies businesses. Both organizations have an issue on their hands concerning environmental protections, hazards and cutting energy cost.
Kaiali’i (Kai) Kahele – NO RESPONSE
Elise Hatsuko Kaneshiro – Due to the impact that this would have on the community – especially the honu, limu, and workforce (who would ultimately feel guilt and responsibility) – I do not support this project. Although I commend them for trying a different approach to generating energy, I find that their process creates too much stress on the environment and believe that they can use this opportunity to find a more suitable solution.
Nicolas T. Love – NO RESPONSE
Byron U. McCorriston – NO RESPONSE
Ryan A. Meza – NO RESPONSE
Jan Moxley – NO RESPONSE
Robert K. Nagamine – NO RESPONSE
Mike Powers – NO RESPONSE
Raymond S. Quel – NO RESPONSE
Robert S. (Steve) Rousseau – NO RESPONSE
Felipe C. San Nicolas – It is truly sad that the environmental science was not headed, especially after so much $ was invested and people were promised employment. Environmentally burning trees was not a good idea obviously and financially the cost was not cost effective for the consumer..I am not exactly how the state came to the conclusions in which they decided not to renew the permit..
In conclusion, the company that took on this venture should not give up…why don’t they become the only productive oil refinery in hawaii..when Congress revises the Jones act. Being the sole viable refinery in hawaii. Will be financially incredible…
Taylor J. Smith – NO RESPONSE
Michelle Rose Tippens – NO RESPONSE
STATE SENATOR, DIST 2 CANDIDATES:
Smiley Burrows – Aloha e Just Transition Hawaii, My name is Smiley Burrows and I’m a candidate running for the Senate Seat District 2 position for Puna/ Kau. As I am not in support of the environmentally polluting power plant Hu Honua, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude for the many community members that took a solid stance against it. I also want to thank the PUC for it’s decision to not allow the facility to destroy the precious water resources so important to Hawaii Island. As we move forward, it is clear that their are better, cleaner, cheaper solutions for energy on our island that we are borrowing from our future generations.I will continue to support the efforts of our island people with the deepest of intentions towards sensible solutions!Mahalo nui for the opportunity for me to share my voice, Imua Jakob, Smiley Burrows
Ron G. Ka-ipo – NO RESPONSE
Howard Leslie, Sr. – NO RESPONSE
Joy San Buenaventura – NO RESPONSE
STATE REPRESENTATIVE CANDIDATES:
District 1
Mark M. Nakashima – NO RESPONSE
Lorraine Pualani Shin – As a business woman in Hilo, I understand the position of those who are against the bioenergy plant, and I agree with their findings. It’s very unfortunate and unfair to the Honua Bioenergy who invested over $350 million to build this plant with the approvals of our county government and then be denied HELCO’s request for a waiver for competitive bidding? Do we now have to contend with our tax dollars being used to refund the $350 million? Are there alternative solutions?
District 2
Devin Shaw McMackin, Sr. – NO RESPONSE
Christopher L.T. Todd – NO RESPONSE
District 3
Frederick F. Fogel – NO RESPONSE
Susan Hughes – NO RESPONSE
Shannon Lopeka Matson – I am always wary of “us vs them” narratives, especially in regards to that old environmentalists vs workers story. I do not believe those who are concerned about the environment have anything but support for workers and I believe the workers genuinely care for and love their environment. Our local workers deserve living-wage, safe, clean, efficient, cost-effective, jobs. Our community deserves safe, clean, efficient, cost-effective alternative energy sources. This project in question offers none of this. I appreciate and respect the PUC’s decision in this matter. If elected, I will be doing all I can to ensure that there are an abundance of living-wage, safe, clean, efficient, cost-effective, jobs and the same in regards to alternative energy sources.
Richard H.K. Onishi – NO RESPONSE
District 4
Hope (Alohalani) Cermelj – NO RESPONSE
Desmon Antone Haumea – ALOHA! These concepts is NOT a progressive energy alternative. I do have a Humanitarian Plan in place that I will share with the populace heading to the General Election. Should I succeed as the Representative for the Puna District, Puna will be a laboratory for sustainability shared globally and correct Governance for Hawaii.
Greggor Ilagan – NO RESPONSE
Brian Ley – First , Mahalo to the company for trying to transition from fossil fuel coal to a renewable energy source. Once again, state and county agencies have failed the communities and businesses by issuing permits for such an ill-conceived plan. If we could have addressed the concerns in the beginning, we might have been able to avoid these environmental concerns (like using a closed looped system). Hawaii deserves and needs a 24 hour dependable power source. Wind and solar are not environmentally feasible. Windmills kill our endangered species. We also need to think of these unrecyclable fiberglass blades and solar panels with toxic waste. We live on an island. We should be looking into wave energy technology and ocean thermal energy conversion as a reliable 24/7 energy baseload.
Eileen Ohara – While the Honua Ola or Hu Honua plant is not in the district I’m hoping to serve, I can weigh in on this issue as it could affect energy prices for all of the island. I stand by the letter that Senator Ruderman recently wrote to the PUC discrediting the comments made by his Senate colleague and Chair of the Senate Energy Committee who is not from the Big Island. There are too many false claims and incorrect information being spread about this operation which was never designed to meet energy sustainability goals, and is simply being pursued for profit. While it is upsetting for anyone to lose employment, especially in these COVID times, those potential job losses should not be a reason to overturn the PUC’s ruling on the requirement for competitive bidding. That argument appears to be simply a bait and switch effort meant to distract, while what’s really at issue is the fact that waiving competition will leave Big Island customers paying more for utility electricity.
District 5
Colehour Bondera – The State Constitution’s Public Trust Doctrine legislates to “conserve and protect” all natural resources, including land, water, air, minerals and energy sources “for future generations”.
Numerous court rulings have found the state and counties have an “affirmative duty” to proactively prevent irreparable harm to constitutionally-protected Public Trust resources.
The 2016 national Democratic platform supports “using every tool available to reduce emissions now”.
In June 2017, Governor Ige signed bills SB559 and HB1578 that adopt goals of the Paris climate agreement.
Honua Ola’s “Application to Add Greenhouse Gas Emission Provisions” to the State Department of Health states it would release 288,920 tons of CO2, as well as 22 tons of methane, and 11 tons of nitrous oxide into the air every year, when alternative means producing renewable energy in Hawai’i, such as solar and wind power, exist that would have negligible greenhouse emissions.
In addition, Honua Ola would draw up to 33 million of gallons of water per day from the East Mauna Kea fresh water aquifer, more than daily fresh water usage in districts of North and South Kona combined.
Finally, Honua Ola would mix chemical additives into this fresh water before daily injecting tens of millions of gallons of tainted fresh water back into the East Mauna Kea aquifer.
The United States Supreme Court has found that injections wells located one-half mile inland in West Maui were having a severe negative impact of the nearshore marine environment, while Honua Ola’s injection well would be only 100 feet from the shoreline.
Honua Ola would annually clear-cutting of thousands of acres of forested land will result in increased erosion of irreplaceable soil, flood risk due to decreased soil permeability, and depletion of soil fertility on the island of Hawai’i.
In July 2017, the Hawai‘i Public Utilities Commission approved Honua Ola, without considering the estimated 72 daily round-trips to truck logs from forests to the facility and to transport waste ash from the facility to the North Kona landfill, thereby increasing resident commute times and negatively impacting visitor experiences on the island of Hawai’i, or the substantial negative impact on state and county road maintenance costs and public health, safety, and welfare in general.
For the aforementioned reason, I oppose the development of the proposed Honua Ola facility and urge the Public Utilities Commission and other commissions and agencies of the State and County of Hawai‘i, as well as elected officials to adhere to the principles of the Hawai‘i Constitution, the Fresh Water Initiative, and Hawai’i state law.
I do not believe a small number of jobs provide justification for the short- and long-term harm to the unique, irreplaceable resources of this most remote land on Earth.
Citlalli Johanna Decker – NO RESPONSE
Jeanne Kapela – The PUC’s ruling on the Honua Ola Bioenergy Plant highlights the need to develop policies that uplift both people and our planet. For too long, Hawai’i’s political leaders have pursued an agenda that puts the interests of labor and the environment in competition with one another.
That must change. To deliver the future our keiki deserve, we need to establish a Green New Deal that invests heavily in clean energy and conservation programs, while creating good-paying green jobs that provide a living wage of at least $17/hour and basic labor protections, like paid sick and family leave.
COVID-19 has revealed the need to dramatically shift our economy away from unsustainable industries and, instead, fully fund initiatives that benefit both workers and our environment, like renewable energy and sustainable agriculture. Now, more than ever, we need to build a green economy that delivers prosperity for all who call our islands home and preserves our ‘āina for generations to come.
District 6
Nicole Lowen – NO RESPONSE
District 7
Rachel L. Harrington – NO RESPONSE
David A. Tarnas – NO RESPONSE
OHA HAWAII RESIDENT TRUSTEE CANDIDATES:
Kauilani Almeida – I support the PUC ruling because I am against the Hu Honua Bioenergy Plant and its extensive negative impacts to our resources. The motion for reconsideration should be denied.
Nolan Cashman-Aiu – NO RESPONSE
Laura L. DeSoto-McCollough – NO RESPONSE
Louis (Lui) Hao – NO RESPONSE
Cyd L. (Makanui) Hoffeld – NO RESPONSE
Pua Ishibashi – I am not supportive of HONUA OLA/HU HONUA.
It does not make economic sense.
Solar and wind are more economical.
It is not an effective or efficient use of our resources.
The answer here, I believe, is micro grids using solar and wind.
I believe solar and wind are our sustainable energy future.
Craig (Bo) Kahui – NO RESPONSE
Lei Kihoi – Aloha.
I am AGAINST HONUA OLA/HU HONUA because its’ operation would have a negative impact on our (1) water supply, water source; (2) increase the contaminants in the air; (3) have a detrimental impact on our oceans.
Deny the motion for reconsideration.
Keola Lindsey – I recognize that there are jobs at stake in this issue. The many hard working folks who only want to put in and honest days work to provide for their families have nothing to do with the policy, process and planning decisions that have brought uncertainty to this project at this point.I believe the PUC acted within their authority when they did not approve the Purchase Power Agreement between Hu Honua and the Hawaiian Electric Light Company and denied the request for a waiver from competitive bidding.Renewable energy projects should reduce our dependence on imported and unsustainable fossil fuels, benefit the ratepayer and be responsible to our environment. Based on the information I have reviewed, the cost for this project to produce power when compared to other renewable energy types (i.e. solar and wind) must be carefully assessed. Furthermore, the Hamakua and larger community have raised serious environmental concerns that must be addressed. In 2019, the Hawai`i Supreme Court instructed the PUC to consider greenhouse gas emissions from the project and to hold a hearing on this topic. This never occurred. The stated environmental concerns and community impacts emphasize why this project (specifically the change from coal to biofuel burning) should have prepared an environmental impact statement document in full compliance with and meet the stated intent of the Hawaii Environmental Policy Act (HRS, Chapter 343). The goal for Hawai`i County to obtain the majority, or all of our power from renewable projects by the end of this decade is realistic and within our reach. Project proponents must meaningfully engage with and provide long-term benefits to communities, and ensure complete responsibility to our natural and cultural resources. Mahalo.
Lanakila Mangauil – I stand strongly in support of the PUC ruling. It is obvious that Honua Ola is not a means to affordable energy for our communities. Cleaner, safer alternative energy sources are more affordable. Solar is 7-8 cents per megawatt compared to 22 cents per megawatt to burn trees.
With the added proof of further environmental degradation, bio-mass power plants should not be allowed on the Island of Hawaiʻi. The main call to fight against global climate change is to reduce emissions that enter the atmosphere. Honua Ola will greatly add emissions. Honua Ola is not producing “clean energy” by any means. Anything less than truly clean, affordable energy is not acceptable at this critical time of Climate Crisis
We also need to take under consideration that for an island, one of the most vital resources to protect is water. This plant would be extracting clean water from the aquifer and re-injecting polluted water back into the earth- a mere stoneʻs throw away from the ocean!
I feel the residents of Hawaii Island need to be part of the process in developing a cost effective solution that champions safe and clean alternatives. Our state and county governments need to support the local workforce by providing training and education . They should also encourage community owned and operated business by offering support through tax relief during the transition and implementation of these truly clean and proven technologies.
Louis (Kauka) Pau – I do not support honus Ola plant and recommend canceling any agreement forcing HELCO to buy energy produced by honua. Shut it down. The ecological damage is not worth going through with it. Louis Pau, MD
Kalaniakea Wilson – NO RESPONSE
OHA MOLOKAI RESIDENT TRUSTEE CANDIDATES:
Luana Alapa – NO RESPONSE
U’i Kahue-Cabanting – NO RESPONSE
Colette (Piipii) Machado – NO RESPONSE
OHA KAUAI RESIDENT TRUSTEE CANDIDATES:
Dan Ahuna – NO RESPONSE
Brittny Perez – Based on the information provided, I can not say that I would support Hu Honua and the way they choose to conduct their business in the energy industry. Our resources are finite and must be protected not polluted.
Kamealoha Smith – NO RESPONSE
OHA-AT-LARGE TRUSTEE CANDIDATES:
Keli’i Akina – Mahalo for the opportunity to share my mana’o on the conflict surrounding Hu Honua (also known as “Honua Ola”), a power plant on the Hamakua Coast. As the matter is open for public consideration, I believe it is important for us to ensure that all stakeholders are brought to the table and respectfully listened to. As with many conflicts, there are important Hawaiian values on both sides of the issue. On the one hand, it is imperative that we malama the ‘aina and ensure the environmental sustainability of the island. On the other hand, it is vital that we provide a livelihood and jobs for our kanaka maoli and residents of the Big Island. OHA should play a role, along with other community organizations, of bringing stakeholders together to find a mutually agreeable pathway.
Jackie (Kahookele) Burke – In responding to your request for comments: As it stands now, the data presented and factors affecting the ‘Aina in a negative manner does not find me supporting this energy industry.Higher usage costs then solar makes a good argument, but what are the comparisons with the current status quo?Also jobs are important, but based on a negative feedback to environmental issues does not make sense, as degrading the environment creates job loses eventually. I seriously want OHA to support geo-thermal energy, a gift from Pele & see the blessings for all that this energy option exist. It’s been 20 years or more, technology is always evolving & improving. Thank you for reaching out and seeking my opinion.
Lani Rae S.L. Suiso Garcia – The PUC should deny Hu Honua’s Motion for Reconsideration. There is clearlyno substitute whatsoever for clean air. Given the destruction of the environment by global warming, the PUC’s obligation is to clean air, not to those who pollute. Workers in these toxic industries must find an alternative means of economic survival. Efficient, clean energy is the paradigm, not toxic, greenhouse gas omitting dinosaurs.
Kaipo K. Hanakahi – NO RESPONSE
Larry K. Kawaauhau – NO RESPONSE
Shane Akoni Palacat-Nelsen – NO RESPONSE
Robert Rabideau, Jr. – NO RESPONSE
Lenson (Kawekiu) Sonoda – NO RESPONSE
Keoni Souza – NO RESPONSE
Steven Thomas – NO RESPONSE
HAWAII MAYOR CANDIDATES:
Neil A. Azevedo – NO RESPONSE
Paul (Amaury) Bryant – Going past this area of contention for several years now I have to say the initial plan seemed dumb from the get-go. Spending millions to convert an obsolete facility into a similar problematical one was very short-sighted with both owners and investors betting on a bad wager. They seem to have thought once it was going they’d be able to bluff their way through minus the proper pre-authorization paperwork. I believe this manner of doing anything is over or surely coming to an end in the whole of Hawaii state.YES something needs to be done with the poorly cared for eucalyptus plantings but adding to environmental problems is not a smart move. And I fear despite the seemingly endless acreage of these spindly trees, their lack of diameter will not be sufficient a fuel source for longterm. More importantly with the cheaper cost of solar, et al why impose a “TAX” on Helco users for two companies that have supported poor planning from the start with it against-the-grain hopes. Shut it down! No ifs, ands or buts.
Carl Allan Cadavona – NO RESPONSE
Daniel H. Cunningham – NO RESPONSE
Harvey W. Eli – NO RESPONSE
Bob Fitzgerald – NO RESPONSE
Robert (Kelly) Greenwell – NO RESPONSE
Grayden K. Ha’i-Kelly – NO RESPONSE
Stacy Higa – NO RESPONSE – but supports as expressed by this photo…
Wendell J. Ka’ehu’ae’a – Someone, forgot to Mail IGE and PUC the 2million Donation Check. I SUPPORT All Business for our Island Energy resources.
Yumi T.R. Kawano – NO RESPONSE
Harry Kim – NO RESPONSE
Ikaika Marzo – NO RESPONSE
Mitch Roth – NO RESPONSE
Mike D. Ruggles – I believe the PUC ruling was the responsible decision, because of Honua Ola’s potential high pollution that would adversely impact the environment and community, and its high cost/megawatt. I would like to see the facility converted by the County, into a wood gasifier, possibly coupled with a combined cycle power Plant or even a waste gasifier. This will be more environmentally-friendly, sustainable, and ultimately, I believe it will be more profitable for the County and safer for the community. We can use roadside trees, like the Albezia and other fast growing invasive trees, as a sustainable fuel source to generate power and make products such as biochar, natural gas, alcohols, gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. I would also like to start a program to utilize trees from private property, before bulldozing or in need of invasive tree control, and to incentivise individuals and businesses who bring wood to the facility. This would also result in clearer power lines, and roadsides, make the County more disaster ready and would help eradicate invasive species. The ends do not justify the means. I agree that we need to find alternative energy solutions and create local jobs, but it must be done in a way that is responsible, sustainable, and safe for our environment, and community. With today’s technology, and having various options for harnessing alternative energy, we can do better than the Honua Ola bioenergy plant.
Abolghassem A. Sadegh – NO RESPONSE
Ted (Toku San) Shaneyfelt – Not competitive with geothermal. Three good geothermal plants could potentially power our entire island’s electric grid needs.
Tante T. Urban – NO RESPONSE
Lahi (Marlin) Verschuur – NO RESPONSE
James M. (Jim) Yuda – NO RESPONSE
HAWAII PROSECUTING ATTORNEY CANDIDATES:
Jared Kamakakulani Auna – NO RESPONSE
Christopher R. Bridges – NO RESPONSE
Stephen L. Frye – NO RESPONSE
Helden Braun Akoni Waltjen – NO RESPONSE
HAWAII COUNCILMEMBER CANDIDATES:
District 1
Elroy C. Juan – They should train those people on how to fix solar panels and install and maintain and make them, and teach them how to recycle paper, glass and plastic and green waste.
Heather L. Kimball – Hawaii Island needs more diversified and stable employment opportunities. It is unfortunate that, through no fault of their own, the employees of Hu Honua have been caught up in an energy market where technology and costs are evolving rapidly.
The fact is, with significant improvements in storage capacity, solar plus storage can now be delivered non-intermittently and at a much lower cost. The two new solar projects approved for Hawaii Island can provide energy at 8 cents per KWh and the cost of solar is expected to continue to decrease over time.
High energy costs are a barrier to business and farmers in Hawaii. They also place a burden on local families, especially those living on a fixed income. With Hu Honua’s proposed cost of 22 cents per KWh over 30 years, the PUC decision was made to protect the interests of these ratepayers. Even without this project HECO projects that Hawaii Island will be able to generate almost all of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030.
It is my hope, as we plan for economic recovery and move to diversify our economy, that there is a strong focus on creating more reliable employment opportunities for our residents on the HamakuaCoast and around the island.
Jaerick K. Medeiros-Garcia – NO RESPONSE
Jaclyn L. Moore – Hu Honua should competitively bid with other alternative energy projects. Other clean(er) energy projects can also create jobs with less impact to the environment and already degrading infrastructure.
Bethany Joy Morrison – NO RESPONSE
Monique Cobb Adams Perreira – I think the recent decision by the PUC in regards to Hu Honua was pono. Sounds like it was a bad investment to begin with. Hawaii needs clean green, cost effective power and I don’t believe Hu Honua represented that. Although saddened at the loss of jobs at a time like now when we are seeing record unemployment we cannot continue to place a higher value on jobs over our environment.
Dominic Yagong – The request to the PUC was to waive Honua Ola from the competitive bid process. In the interest of the rate payers of Hawaii Island, the decision by the PUC not to waive Honua Ola from the competitive bid process holds water. Competitive bidding is the basis for procurement laws utilized by the State and County government that requires bids from various vendors. In light of the competitive bids received by the PUC involving impending renewable projects, the solar alternatives are produced at such a lower cost it made the waiver request from competitive bidding virtually unsupportable based on the saving cost to the consumers. I also believe that Hawaiian Electric statement as reported by Hawaii News Now did not lend support for the waiver. I quote, “Even without Hu Honua, proposed and existing renewable energy projects…will enable Hawaii Island to use renewable resources to generate nearly all of its electricity by the end of this decade.” Not a strong endorsement for Honua Ola. Based on the waive or not the waive question that was before the PUC, the stark realization of cheaper renewable energy that solar and other technology does provide showed why the competitive bid process is necessary from the point of view of the Hawaii Island ratepayers. High energy costs due to old technology of burning fossil fuels have added to the difficulties that businesses and residents have faced for years. This higher electrical cost is a major factor in the high cost of living here in Hawaii. Competitive bidding provides the safety net for consumers ensuring that they are paying the lowest possible rate for renewable energy which will be a benefit to the overall economy. Based on the numbers provided by Just Transition Hawaii Coalition, if a brand new Toyota Camry price is $30,000 would you be willing to pay $48,900 for the identical brand new Toyota Camry? That is what a 63% variance does to pricing and that is why competitive bidding is right for the consumer and economy. With that said, I don’t rejoice in 40 working families having their well paying jobs and family medical benefits placed in jeopardy. Our economy is in the tank and real people will be getting hurt. I do support Honua Ola requesting a reconsideration as it is part of the process. Life of the Land rightfully was given their opportunity to appeal to the Supreme Court. Fair is fair. It could be an insurmountable task for Honua Ola to overturn the PUC decision, however, at the very least the working employees deserve the opportunity to be heard. Most importantly, we need to end this controversy one way or the other as it has been cause for serious division in our community.
District 2
Aaron S.Y. Chung – NO RESPONSE
William Halversen – NO RESPONSE
Ned W.P. Rogers – NO RESPONSE
District 3
Henry K. Kaaihue, Jr. – NO RESPONSE
Susan (Sue) Lee Loy – NO RESPONSE
Paul K. Neves – NO RESPONSE
District 4
Ashley L. Kierkiewicz – NO RESPONSE
Ryan R. Thompson – NO RESPONSE
Michael Warren – NO RESPONSE
District 5
Matt Kaneali’i-Kleinfelder – NO RESPONSE
Ikaika Rodenhurst – NO RESPONSE
Frederic (Ric) Wirick – NO RESPONSE
District 6
Richard Abbett – NO RESPONSE
Marie J. Burns – NO RESPONSE
Maile (Medeiros) David – NO RESPONSE
District 7
Jane Clement – NO RESPONSE
Kelly Drysdale – NO RESPONSE
Rebecca Villegas – NOTE: After Villegas expressed her support of the PUC ruling below, she was promptly sent a certified letter from the ILWU, rescinding their endorsement of her candidacy. That letter is posted below, beneath her comment.
I am opposed to Hu Honua and any kind of Biomass Energy project on the Big Island that burns trees for energy. A project like this actually quite preposterous. Just a couple of minutes of research provided a broad selection of scientific backing for my opinion.
Here are some of the facts I found:
- Burning trees will emit about 1.5 times more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than coal and three times more than natural gas.
- CO2 is a greenhouse gas that warms the Earth, heats and acidifies the oceans, melts the ice caps and leads to sea level rise that threatens the existence of shoreline populations worldwide.
- Water is another thing vital to life.
- So the plan is to inject 21 million gallons of heated and chemically tainted waste water a day into deep wells adjacent to important fresh water aquifers and treasured marine ecosystems.
- Maui County just lost their case in the US Supreme Court proving they are in violation of the Clean Water Act for operating injection wells very similar to what’s proposed by Hu Honua
- The Hawaii Supreme Court sent approval process for Hu Honua back to the Public Utilities Commission because they forgot to consider the greenhouse gas impacts and didn’t require an environmental impact report. Because the facility had prior approval as a coal fired plant years ago, it was assumed that was good enough. We all know what happens when we assume.
- The only things sustainable of this project are the sustained release of CO2 into the atmosphere with consequent sustained global warming, along with sustained heating, acidification and poisoning of aquifers and the ocean. Not to mention the sustained herbicide dispersals needed to support the replanting needed to feed the diesel fuming truck traffic lumbering up and down our roads day and night.
- So-called biomass energy damages our climate and air, our forests, and our communities while the industryhides behind veils of misinformation.
- When energy companies burn trees to make electricity, the result is increased climate-changing carbon dioxide emissions, devastated ecosystems, and displaced wildlife.
- Forests are one of our best tools for fighting climate change and one of our best defenses against its impact. They’re also where we hike, camp, hunt, and fish.
- Forests enhance our quality of life and our well-being
- Per unit of energy, biomass results in higher emissions than coal.
- For years, scientists have warned that burning trees to produce electricity worsens climate change in the same way as coal and other fossil fuels do. Because wood is a less energy-dense fuel, biomass-burning plants emit more CO2 from their smokestacks than coal to generate the same amount of electricity. And cutting older trees and replacing them with saplings reduces a forest’s carbon storage for decades or more (and only if those forests are allowed to regrow and not converted to plantations).
- Even when power plants burn forestry residues—the leftovers from logging operations—the result is more CO2 in the atmosphere for decades. This is incompatible with the urgent need to cut emissions to limit the damage from global warming.
- Biomass companies rely on an industry-dominated certification scheme to “greenwash” their practices as environmentally friendly.
- We need to be growing, not shrinking, our forest carbon sink. Burning trees for electricity takes us backward.
- Without massive subsidies, biomass can’t compete with solar and wind.
- Trees pull CO2 out of the atmosphere and sequester it while producing the oxygen we breathe. So we’re going to cut them down, burn them up, and re-release the CO2 into the air while reducing a significant stock of oxygen production?
- On Mauna Loa sensors recently measured the highest levels of atmospheric CO2 ever. Then the Amazon jungle, source of 20% of the Earth’s oxygen, burns and releases into the air the world’s largest suppository of carbon dioxide.
District 8
Erick Allende – NO RESPONSE
Sean Anderson – NO RESPONSE
Holeka Goro Inaba – I do not support the Hōnua Ola facility due to its negative effects on the environment. However, in the future, I will support energy projects that can mālama our local ecosystems while also providing our residents with competitive energy jobs and rates
Craig (Bo) Kahui – NO RESPONSE
District 9
Philip K. (Ippy) Aiona – NO RESPONSE
Ranae Keane – NO RESPONSE
Herbert (Tim) Richards – NO RESPONSE
Just Transition Hawaii Coalition 