Editorial >

With Hawaii Gov. Josh Green Governor citing the growing impacts of global warming, the states’ top official acknowledged what most residents already know — that is, we are in the early stages of a growing and unstoppable climate crisis, and one which is now modifying Hawaii’s weather and the state’s climate outlook for the foreseeable future.

On Monday, Governor Green announced statewide efforts to enact a climate impact fee on tourists, somebody has to pay.  The $25 climate fee would be levied on visitors who stay hotels or short-term rentals. Green called it a “modest” fee that was “far less than the resort fees or other taxes visitors have paid for years.” He estimated it would generate more than $68 million every year for the state’s use.

Legislative firewall

Last year, a similar proposal died in the Senate in what is increasingly proving to be a dysfunctional legislative process controlled by just two powerful Senators controlling key committee positions, and who are operating without public accountability. Their self-appointed roles as special-interest gatekeepers determine which bills reach a legislative floor vote, let alone ever reaching the Governor’s desk for enactment. It is an example of state democracy at its worse, and one which too many of our citizens haplessly accept as Hawaii’s business-as-usual formula for determining statewide governing priorities. But it is also an obsolete legislative practice, and one which is now threatening a bold climate-response essential to the future of the state, and which will inevitably challenge the status quo.

A warning heard loud & clear

The 2023 Maui wildfires that killed at least 100 people, caused widespread destruction, leaving several thousand Lahaina residents without homes, and is the front and center priority for this 2024 legislative cycle. Other pressing state business will more than likely be deferred to future legislative sessions.

One leadership bright spot which kicked-off the new year was a public presentation by some of Hawaii’s best and brightest on the state of climate – weather changes increasingly impacting Hawaii, and the world. The January 11th event, aka the 32nd legislative Interim of 2023, was hosted by Senator Mike Gabbard and Rep. Nicole Lowen, each responsible for environmental and climate issues within their respective state legislative chambers.

With each passing year, it is globally hotter than the previous year.

One of the presentations high points during the 3-hour hearing was Hawaii’s foremost climate expert, Chip Fletcher, PhD – University of Hawaii at Manoa. Dr. Fletcher provided the panel with a detailed overview of present and future climate consequences on life in Hawaii as the result of rising global temperatures now underway.

Three (3) climate-impacted areas of particular interest to the audience and the state are 1) increasing drought impacts on agriculture, 2) flooding of low-lying coastal areas, and 3) the increasing frequency and ferocity of cyclones and extreme weather events, the latter has been directly linked to the Lahaina fire disaster on Maui last year.

A corresponding climate-sustainability message all presenters seem to agree on was the need for an urgent and statewide transition (one superseding old assumptions), and that time is not on our side when it comes to preparing for the inevitability climate changes. And, how Hawaii is ill-equipped to address a rapidly changing climate increasingly measured in lost opportunity, and rising economic and social costs.

Update Jan 10, 2024

U.S. BEV Sales Surge in 2023

Cox Automotive said on Tuesday that Americans bought 317,168 battery-electric vehicles in the fourth quarter, up 40% from 225,865 a year ago. BEVs accounted for roughly 8% of all new car sales in the fourth quarter and between 7% and 8% of total US vehicle sales in 2023.

Originally Published Jan 2, 2024

One in Two Cars Sold Worldwide Will Have an All-Electric Powertrain by 2030

US BEV (battery electric vehicle) sales for 2023 have surpassed 1 million in the United States, with global EV sales projected to reach were more than twice that number  – it was also the first time Electric Vehicle sales exceeded that threshold in a single sales year.

The National Automobile Dealer Association (NADA) reported through first 11 months of 2023, BEV (100% electric) sales totaled 1,007,984 – an increase of 50.7% year-over-year.

Tesla alone is estimated to have delivered 1.82 million vehicles globally in 2023, up 37% from 2022, and of that total, about 473,000 vehicles in the fourth quarter. Tesla’s global EV sales numbers contradict media reports that the-sky-is-falling on EV consumer hopes and demand for electrification.

Over one million US sales in 2023 is a major milestone for the EV industry and a major step toward transportation electrification. National Automobile Dealer Association data supported the growth in EV demand with growth month-over-month increasing steadily from 6.4% of new vehicle sales in January to 7.2% in October 2023.

Still, overall, the US has lagged Europe and China in adopting EVs, and auto executives and politicians have been eager to catch up so America doesn’t lose the transportation technology race. But many auto buyers aren’t going along for the ride.

At present, EVs generally remain too costly for the average buyer with an average price of $60,544, about $13,000 more than the typical gas-fueled car, according to Edmunds Automotive.

Yet, for Hawaii, at least, the story is little different for consumers who do their homework before entirely dismissing a potential EV purchase.  Tesla’s popular mass market SUV, the Model Y, starts at $36,490 after federal EV tax credit, a price that excludes taxes and fees.  Hyundai’s appropriately named “Kona” EV for 2024 has a MSRP price of $32,675 (before taxes and fees).  An another cost consideration, EV price premiums, recently, were even more painful as interest rate loans for autos has soared. The good news, as inflation recedes so are auto loan costs.

Also many potential EV buyers, before doing their homework investigating a purchase, generally see EVs as too risky if they run out of juice with no charger in sight. As explained later in this series, that is less an issue and worry for Hawaii’s island-based residents.  Reading the tea leaves, every automotive company was full steam ahead on electrification a couple of years ago, but that momentum has slowed over the past six months.

General Motors announced it was backing down from its near-term goal of 400,000 units by mid-2024. Additionally, Ford Motor Company has halved its 2024 production guidance for its electric pickup truck, the F-150 Lightning.

Against this backdrop, Tesla’s 38% growth of such a large number is impressive. Growing large numbers isn’t easy. Increasing deliveries from 435,000 in Q3 to 484,000 in Q4 as your competitors slow? It’s a solid quarter. Tesla still sold 35 times the electric vehicles Rivian did in Q4, and unlike Rivian its sales grew sales quarter over quarter.

What does it all mean? One could argue that broader EV demand may have softened in recent months (more on this below). But rather than all EV companies suffering equally, consumers opted for the most established brand, Tesla.

Biden Policy Transforming America into a 21st Century Economy

It was 2023 which marked the best year for EV sales in our nation’s history, and with President Biden’s leadership, the enactment of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act are the key Federal Policy enablers in the transformation of America into a competitive 21st century clean tech economy.  US investments in the development and manufacturing of EV’s, batteries also are producing new and well-paying jobs within technology foundation essential to America’s global competitiveness.

Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act has also attracted $103 billion in new private sector investment announcements, including the manufacturing of EVs ($11 billion), batteries ($72 billion), as well as other areas accompanying industrial investments in battery components ($10 billion) and recycling ($4 billion).  The first IRA-related and globally competitive EV and battery factories are scheduled to open in the second half of 2024, with more coming online in 2025 and beyond.

Transitioning to EV manufacturing and products is apparently harder than it appears for conventional ICE automakers

Bloomberg reported that traditional automakers rush into the electric vehicle sector was to scale their business into EV’s, but in attempting to do it, Ford and General Motors have since opted to scale back their EV goals. Cathie Wood of ARK Investments, who current holds a large position in Tesla, stated … “We expected a lot of traditional auto manufacturers to see the writing on the wall and rush as quickly as they could into scaling big time into electric vehicles. And what has happened recently? Both GM and Ford have said, ‘We’re stepping back. We’re not going to do this until it’s profitable,’” Wood noted.

Wood’s comments about Ford and GM are quite accurate. General Motors was planning to produce 400,000 electric cars by mid-2024, but this target has been abandoned, as per CFO Paul Jacobson. The production of the electric Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra will be delayed by a year as well, as noted in a Fortune report. Ford, meanwhile, has slashed its F-150 Lightning output from 3,200 to 1,600 per week over production and demand concerns.

“The problem with that is in order to be profitable, they (Ford and GM) need to scale. That’s how this works. Their learning curve as traditional ICE (Internal Combustion Engine )vehicle makers may be longer than anticipated as they write down costs. So the fact that they’re pulling back means there’s more market share for Tesla in its growing EV leadership role, and for others who choose to go for it,” Wood said. 

Interestingly enough, the EV sector is still growing pretty well in the United States. J.D. Power has noted that about 869,000 electric cars were sold in the US in the first ten months of the year. That’s a jump of about 56% year-over-year. This jump, however, was likely driven mostly by Tesla, whose mainstream vehicles like the Model Y crossover and Model 3 sedan dominate their respective market segments.

Tesla’s lowest cost and mass-market all-electric 4-5 passenger utility vehicle is said to be in the early stages of development and projected to be priced in the $25,000 range.

The new vehicle is code name the Model 2 by the media. It is expected to incorporate the economic, manufacturing, technology lessons and growth of Tesla’s recent past and which will guide the vehicle’s development and accelerate its time-to-market. The Model 2’s low entry price is targeted at $25,000, with little compromise anticipated in vehicle utility, performance, and range compared with Tesla’s current line of luxury models.

The days of the sub-$10,000 new car are long behind us, and the days of the sub-$20,000 new car may not be far behind. But if a rock-bottom price is what buyers are looking for there is limited choice, variety, in ICE (gas-powered) models and makes.

Today’s lowest cost 2023-24 gas-powered vehicle examples:

• Mitsubishi Mirage ES: $17,790
  Kia Rio LX: $17,875
  Nissan Versa S: $18,745
  Kia Forte LX: $20,815
  Hyundai Venue SE: $20,985
  Kia Soul LX: $21,215
  Chevrolet Trax LS: $21,495
  Nissan Sentra S: $21,725
  Hyundai Elantra SE: $22,065

But it’s the affordable $25,000 mass market vehicle price range in which Tesla is aiming at with the introduction of the all-new, all-electric, and low cost Model 2. A price point today exemplified by the 2023-24 gas-fueled Chevrolet Trailblazer and Toyota Corolla Crossover.

See part 2 of this BeyondKona exclusive story and discover…

“Why going all-electric in Hawaii makes sense for many of the state’s residents today”

COP 28 ends with a Bang and a Whimper

The UN climate summit ended on Wednesday with a compromise deal that called for a “transition away” from fossil fuels. The stronger term “phase-out” had been backed by 130 of the 198 countries negotiating in Dubai but was blocked by petrostates including Saudi Arabia.

Nearly 200 countries at the COP28 climate summit have agreed to a deal that for the first time calls on all nations to transition away from fossil fuels to avert the worst effects of climate change.

The climate agreement has been hailed as historic; first citing of fossil fuels as the root cause of the climate crisis in 30 years of climate negotiations.

But scientists said the agreement contained many loopholes and did not match the severity of the climate emergency.  Instead, it reached a compromise that called on countries to contribute to global efforts to transition “away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science”.

The Alliance of Small Island States, representing 39 countries, said it had not been in the room when the deal was adopted as it was still coordinating its response.  Its lead negotiator, Anne Rasmussen, from Samoa, did not formally object to the agreement and believed the deal had good elements, but said the “the process has failed us” and the text included a “litany of loopholes”. “  “We have made an incremental advancement over business-as-usual when what we really needed is an exponential step change in our actions and support,” Rasmussen said.

The governments of the world have agreed on a declaration at the Cop28 climate summit that has been both hailed as historic, but dismissed as weak.

• Countries agreed on a text that encourages countries to move away from fossil fuels and quickly ramp up renewable energy

• Island states whose homes are being washed away by rising sea levels said the text was an improvement but contains a “litany of loopholes”

• Scientists said the document did not go far enough for world leaders to honour the promise they made to keep the planet from heating 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures by the end of the century

• Poorer countries said they were frustrated by the lack of a concrete plan to adapt to climate change and money to do so

During final day of the COP 28 global climate summit:

• More countries expressed anger at the climate resolution draft text for its lack of ambition.

• The UK’s climate minister criticized for leaving the climate conference early, without any issue resolution, described as “an outrageous dereliction of leadership at the most critical point of the conference…”

• Campaigners warn the historic loss and damage agreement from day one of the summit remains unfinished

• Indigenous and global south activists called out rich country ‘hypocrisy’ in pushing to phase out fossil fuels

COP28 President Sultan Al Jaber wanted his presidency to be different.

Al Jaber set his sights on the most ambitious agreement since Paris while bringing a deal home on schedule.

Less than 48 hours from the planned end of the summit on Tuesday morning, he was some way off from his ambitions – a place most COP presidents have previously found themselves at this late stage of the summit, that is … the talks weren’t making enough progress and negotiators needed to shift gear. Al Jaber also circled back to the key issue of this COP – that the final text should have language addressing the consumption of all fossil fuels for the first time… “We need to find consensus and common ground on fossil fuel,” Al Jaber said.

Leading oil producers remain opposed

Draft deal is criticized as too weak by many nations in Dubai.  No surprises among the attendee stakeholders, as Saudi Arabia remains strongly opposed to fossil-fuel cuts …

A draft deal at the COP28 climate in Dubai called on countries to cut their consumption and production of fossil fuels as the hosts tried to craft a compromise less than 24 hours before the summit is due to end.

The 21-page agreement would, if adopted, be the first specifically calling for reduced use of all fossil fuels, including oil and gas, marking a historic shift in the UN treaty that governs the global fight against climate change. But for many countries it doesn’t go nearly far enough, falling short of a complete phase-out and offering nations loopholes and opt-outs.

Here are some of the noteworthy exacts from the proposed COP 28 climate summit containing 238 individual articles of agreement:

item 38 – Recognizes the need to accelerate sustainable, affordable, and inclusive energy transitions … that would include, inter alia:

(a) Tripling renewable energy capacity globally and doubling the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030;

(b) Rapidly phasing down unabated coal and limitations on permitting new and unabated coal power generation;

(c) Accelerating efforts globally towards net zero emissions energy systems, utilizing zero and low carbon fuels well before or by around mid-century;

(d) Accelerating zero and low emissions technologies, including, inter alia, renewables, nuclear, abatement and removal technologies, including such as carbon capture and utilization and storage, and low carbon hydrogen production, so as to enhance efforts towards substitution of unabated fossil fuels in energy systems.

(e) Reducing both consumption and production of fossil fuels, in a just, orderly and equitable manner so as to achieve net zero by, before, or around 2050 in keeping with the science;

(f) Accelerating and substantially reducing non-CO2 emissions, including, in particular, methane emissions globally by 2030;

(g) Accelerating emissions reductions from road transport through a range of pathways, including development of infrastructure and rapid deployment of zero and low emission vehicles;

(h) Phasing out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption and do not address energy poverty or just transitions, as soon as possible;

item 95 – Highlights the growing gap between the needs of developing country Parties, in particular those due to the increasing impacts of climate change compounded by difficult macroeconomic circumstances, and the support provided and mobilized for their efforts to implement their nationally determined contributions, highlighting that such needs are currently estimated at USD 5.8–5.9 trillion for the pre-2030 period

item 103 – Emphasizes the importance of scaled up public finance and urges developed country Parties to urgently and significantly scale up their provision of climate finance, technology transfer and capacity;

item 194 – Recognizes the importance of international collaboration in enhancing climate action across all actors of society, sectors and regions, including transboundary cooperation, in contributing to progress towards the goals of the Paris Agreement; and urges Parties and nonParty stakeholders to join efforts to accelerate delivery through inclusive international collaboration;

item 232 – Emphasizes Parties’ collective commitment to promote international cooperation to address implementation gaps and ensure comprehensive responses to climate change, in the context of sustainable development …

“The impacts of climate change are continuing to change faster than we expected them to.”

It’s increasing the urgency for both mitigating greenhouse gases and also implementing adaptation efforts to help us adapt, because we’re not slowing down [warming] anytime soon”… Kris May, Chief executive officer of Pathways Climate Institute in San Francisco.

A Fifth National Climate Assessment report issued today by the US government describes how intensifying climate change is disrupting lives and businesses nationwide, even as communities in every state ramp up their response to the crisis: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/11/14/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-releases-fifth-national-climate-assessment-and-announces-more-than-6-billion-to-strengthen-climate-resilience-across-the-country/

The over 2,000 page report offers a climate-themed tour of the country, identifying the impacts plaguing every region, how communities are increasingly protecting themselves and how much more action is needed to ensure a safer future. The fifth edition of the report follows the fourth edition, which was published in phases in 2017 and 2018; the first assessment appeared in 2000.

Here are the five main takeaways:

1. Climate impacts are here, getting worse and costing a lot of money 

The first sentence of Chapter 1 summarizes the nation’s sobering reality: “The effects of human-caused climate change are already far-reaching and worsening across every region of the United States.” A small taste of what that means: Warming is happening everywhere, and nighttime temperatures are rising faster than daytime temperatures in most places.

Minor and moderate coastal flooding is also on the rise along most Atlantic and Gulf coastlines, while a combination of rising seas and flooding from high tides and big storms is projected for the the mid-pacific and Hawaiian island chain. Meanwhile, warmer winters are contributing to declining snowpack levels in the Northwest, affecting water supplies.

But the most devastating way people experience climate change is in the form of major disasters. Between 2018 and 2022, the country experienced 89 disasters that each cost at least $1 billion in damages — a mix of droughts, floods, severe storms, tropical cyclones, wildfires and winter storms. During that period, Texas alone experienced $375 billion in disaster damages.

2. Certain communities are at higher risk 

No one living in the US is safe from climate change, but low-income communities and people of color are disproportionately at risk of experiencing damaging impacts. In the South, for example, neighborhoods home to racial minorities and low-income people have the highest inland exposure to flooding, concludes the report. Moreover, the report adds, “Black communities nationwide are expected to bear a disproportionate share of future flood damages — both inland and coastal.”

3. Climate solutions are already being deployed nationwide

Knowing the source of the problem (emissions from burning fossil fuels) means we also know how to stop it: by transitioning from fossil fuels to cleaner forms of energy, and possibly by using a mix of natural and manmade processes to pull carbon dioxide and other emissions directly out of the air.

Efforts are already well underway. “Annual US greenhouse gas emissions fell 12% between 2005 and 2019,” largely due to natural gas replacing coal for some electricity generation, the report states. Between roughly 2010 and 2022, cumulative onshore wind capacity, utility-scale solar and EV sales have all gone up nationwide as costs associated with these low-carbon technologies have dropped.

Homes with rooftop solar panels in Rocklin, California. Photographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg

4. Today’s efforts aren’t nearly enough to halt a global climate crisis

Back in 2015, the US joined the Paris Agreement, agreeing to limit future global warming to well below 2C, ideally to 1.5C, compared to preindustrial levels. President Joe Biden then set a national target for the US to cut its emissions by at least 50% by 2030 compared to 2005 levels. Now the reality check: The world is on track to warm above 2C, in part because the US — the second-biggest current emitter and largest historical emitter — is not on pace to meet its goals.

US net emissions would have to fall by more than 6% each year on average to meet existing targets, according to the report. In contrast, US emissions fell by less than 1% per year, on average, between 2005 and 2019.

5. What now? It depends on us …

The more warming there is, the worse the impacts will be. Science can’t tell us exactly how hot the planet will get because that depends on what we — society as a whole but especially our political leaders — decide to do. In the US, and elsewhere in the world, people have a choice right now to do more to cut their carbon footprint and prevent much worse warming.

“How much more the world warms depends on the choices societies make today,” states the report. “The future is in human hands.”

Energy; the Big Picture

Globally, oil, gas and coal benefited from $7tn in taxpayer subsidies and support in 2022 despite being the primary cause of today’s climate crisis

• Fossil fuels received benefited record global subsidies to the tune of $13,000,000 a minute in 2022, according to the International Monetary Fund.

The explicit gas and oil subsidies cut the price of unsustainable fossil fuels for consumers more than doubled in 2022, as countries responded to higher energy prices resulting from Russia’s war in Ukraine. These implicit energy subsidies represent “enormous” costs to society and the environment by advancing global heating emissions.  Upwards to 80% of the total climate impacts and their mitigation costs are shared by the world’s population, regardless of their location as the recent Maui fire tragedy demonstrated.

Extreme weather, fueled by dirty energy, added costs for U.S. taxpayers to the tune of $165 billion in 2022.  There were 18 separate multi billion-dollar climate disasters which highlighted the growing cost of climate change on the Federal budget and those citizens and businesses otherwise directly affected.

Beyond the added cost-to-taxpayers, global heating impacts has translated into a growing economic impact on the P&C insurance sector, and by extension, the broader economy.  Homeowners, rental housing, and commercial building sectors are all experiencing an unprecedented rise in property claims and insurance costs. Whether you own or rent, insurance rates are going up and in some cases way up raising the cost of living for all affected.

In some markets such as California, major insurance providers have stopped issuing P&C insurance policies to new customers or pulled out entirely in states with rising climate-related risks and claim costs. The impact of the Maui fire this year, beyond the social and economic losses, was a wake up call to local insurers. Forthcoming P&C insurance rates on the rise, with both economic and social consequences on insured properties – impacts not yet been fully realized by the residents and businesses of Hawaii.

Hawaii’s Energy Outlook

Energy-driven climate costs in Hawaii are measured less in terms of their economic, social and environmental impacts, and more in terms of energy substitution costs.

State energy priorities are generally determined by a group of select stakeholder interests, beginning with Hawaiian Electric (HE) and its direct and indirect investments in old line combustion power plants throughout the state. Most recently, the utility’s 2023 purchase of Kauai’s only biomass burn plant.  So far, these investments have guided the utility’s decisions towards fulfilling its so-called renewable energy obligations which guide utility energy choices designed to meet statewide regulatory obligations outlined within Hawaii’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS).

The deadline for the fulfillment of the utility’s 100% renewable energy RPS energy transition is 2045. A lot remains to be done within the time remaining and so far HE is off to a slow start. Beyond addressing recent liability lawsuits associated with the Maui fire, Hawaiian Electric has been increasingly saddled with multiple transition challenges, most of which are the result of the utility’s own management decisions, and not opportunities for transformational change and operating improvements.

In response to the state’s renewable energy policy (RPS), Hawaiian Electric’s transition has been driven not by regulatory necessity, but shareholder profits. These same shareholder priorities have somehow not paralyzed mainland utilities towards advancing their grid investments or meeting state-mandated clean energy alternatives and substitutions defined by similar RPS mandates and deadlines.  Yet, HE’s Hawaii Island operating unit, HELCO, has historically spent its time and ratepayers money slow walking its pursuit of fossil fuel substitutes.

The utility’s alternative energy replacements do not face significant technology challenges, rather they offer operating efficiencies, but face a wall of resistance created the utility’s own historic investments in an over-weighted energy dependency on imported diesel and oil and combustion power plants to burn fossil fuels.

Taking advantage of loopholes in the state’s RPS rules the utility help design during its legislative creation process, the utility has, and continues to vigorously pursued unsustainable biomass power plants to argument their fossil fuel investments as a means of regulatory compliance, and mostly exemplified by poor energy substitution choices. These utility actions come at time as a 21st century world is fighting a human-made, and runaway, climate experiment fueled by burning fossil fuels and biomass (from trees-to-trash) just to generate electricity.

HE’s utility energy choices matter.  These same energy choices emit GHG emissions and contribute to accelerating global heating (locally and globally). If that were not enough, the utility’s combustion power bias adds to the state’s costly air and water pollution impacts on our local communities and environment.  But the real salt-in-the-wound impact is immediately felt by ratepayers from these expensive energy choices, infamously continuing to make Hawaii the most expensive energy market in the United States.

Hawaiian Electric’s big island power profile is far from unique for an electric utility still operating in the 20th century, and one heavily invested in old line combustion power plants with an energy bias firmly rooted in obsolete profit models.

Today’s big island electric utility profile strongly supports this conclusion:

HELCO-owned Oil-fired Combustion Power Plants (Oil)

Keahole: 77.6 MW  (Combustion)
Puna: 36.7 MW  (Combustion)
Kanoelehua: 21 MW  (Combustion)
Waimea: 7.5 MW  (Combustion)
Hill: 34.7 MW  (Combustion)
Dispersed generation: 5 MW  (Combustion)

Independent Power Producers

Hamakua Energy (oil 90% / biodiesel 10%): 60 MW (Combustion)
Puna Geothermal Venture (geothermal – variable): Power Specification: 38 MW / Actual power output; 12 to 15 MW (since 2018)

Clean Power Generation:

Puueo Hydro: 3.4 MW  (HELCO owner)
Waiau Hydro: 1.1 MW  (HELCO owner)

Pakini Nui Wind: 20.5 MW  (Independent Power Producer)
Wailuku River Hydro: 12.1 MW  (Independent Power Producer)
Hawi Renewable Development (wind): 10.5 MW  (Independent Power Producer)

AES Waikoloa Solar: 30 MW + 120 MWh storage (Independent Power Producer)

Customer-sited Rooftop Solar: 121 MW  (Independent Power Producers)

HE-proposed or early qualifying stages of development (tbd):

Hale Kuawehi Solar: 30 MW + 120 MWh storage  (Independent Power Producer)
Keahole Battery Energy Storage: 12 MW storage only  (HELCO owner)
Shared solar: 0.750 MW  (Independent Power Producer)

Hu Honua BIOmass: to be determined…

Clean Energy Examples Hawaiian Electric is Failing to Lead or Follow …

Outside of Hawaii, wind, solar, and battery storage are growing exponentially as a share of a new 21st century and technology-driven electric-generating capacity which is growing exponentially each year.

In 2023, wind and solar energy generation combined with battery storage accounted for 82% of all new utility-scale generating capacity developers plan to bring online in the United States, while growing as a share of new electric-generating capacity each year.

Utility-scale solar capacity didn’t start ramping up in the United States until 2010. As the cost of solar panels dropped substantially and state and federal policies introduced generous tax incentives, solar capacity boomed. As of January 2023, 73.5 gigawatts (GW) of utility-scale solar capacity was online and operating in the United States, representing in excess of 6% of the total U.S. grid energy generation.

Just over half of the new U.S. generating capacity expected in 2023 is solar power. If all of the planned capacity comes online this year as expected, it will be the most U.S. solar capacity added in a single year and the first year that more than half of U.S. capacity additions are solar.

Wind and solar are intermittent sources of generation; they only produce electricity when the wind is blowing or the sun is shining, but with energy supplies which will never be disrupted by energy wars or the world’s fossil fuel energy monopolies controlling daily market supply fluctuations and prices.  Battery storage systems are increasingly installed with wind and solar projects, turning intermittent energy sources into firm energy outlets. This year, 2023, developers are on track to add 8.6 GigaWatts of battery storage power capacity to the national grid, which would double the total U.S. battery power capacity now in use.

None of these figures reflect the growing adoption of rooftop and battery storage at the residential level, growing from a fringe energy contributor to an integral clean energy role in freeing America from its historic imported energy dependencies, and in addressing national climate (GHG mitigation) goals.  It merits repeating; batteries turn sun and wind electricity generation from these natural and intermittent energy sources into firm energy assets with excess energy stored and available for on-demand power requirements, and later use.

HE’s (HELCO) pattern of bait and switch on its energy transformation path to renewable energy replacements from its fossil fueled power plant investments is a failure when measured in terms of lost clean energy opportunities. It is also a failure of imagination and innovation that extends back into several generations of complicit state PUC – utility decisions. The exception to this period of unenlightened PUC decisions rubber stamping the utility’s poor energy choices, was an all too brief fruitful period of PUC leadership with Jay Griffin, who chaired the Commission from 2019 – 2022, and represented a period of clean energy regulatory leadership and decisions at their best within the state.

One shining example of the Griffin-led PUC regulatory period was guiding the utility towards cleaning up its dirty energy track record of energy combustion and polluting energy sources. HE saw which way the wind was blowing at the PUC, and advance the proposal and process for the addition to Hawaii Island’s grid of the AES Solar – Storage general plant in Waikoloa.  The $47 million plant features zero GHG emissions and zero polluting energy byproducts, is fully energy free of imported and local supply chain disruptions and energy cost hikes. The AES solar plant further serves as HELCO’s show piece for doing something right for a change towards advancing the State’s and the County’s clean energy economy.

Unfortunately, this single example of 21st century clean energy power on Hawaii island (at utility scale) is just that a single example. Yes, there is some utility movement towards reconciling the island’s legacy wind farms and their future, but even those limited examples are outliers to overall poor and inefficient business decisions by the utility in serving its fiduciary role of serving ratepayer interests.

The AES solar plant features the most reliable and the lowest cost energy option the utility has to offer ratepayers.  In comparison to the HELCO’s combustion power plant the AES plant deliveries electricity to ratepayers as little as 1/3 the cost of some other utility combustion power sources within Hawaii Island energy portfolio.

When the heavily promoted Hu Honua burning trees-for-power plant was proposed, HELCO expected utility power supply costs to jump to $0.44 cent per KWh, and compared to the AES solar+battery Waikoloa plant at a mere $.09 cents per KWh.  The AES clean energy benefits represented a stark comparison in terms of ratepayer savings and climate benefits. With ratepayers picking up the entire energy cost, it had little impact the utility’s plans.

Another outstanding and differentiating AES clean power advantage of zero emissions power production is represented in offering Hawaii Island residents the highest levels of energy efficiency at the lowest cost on the Big Island grid today — areas which combustion power plants cannot compete – period.  The economics of combustion-based and legacy utility power choices on ratepayers is clear – they cost more, considerable more than clean energy alternatives available to HELCO and HE statewide.

Equally important, these inefficient and hazardous energy choices block the statewide adoption of abundant solar-wind-batteries firm energy alternatives, and achieving essential progress in transforming Hawaii into a clean, resilient. and self-sufficient energy economy.

The utility-led arguments that so-called firm energy can only be accomplished with last century combustion power plants is a false argument.  Battery storage is the game changer, along with other energy storage options including hydro transform so-called intermittent energy sources into on-demand energy assets which far more cost effective and resilient that legacy combustion power plants. It is only a matter scale, not technology limitations.

The AES solar plant is expected to result in total avoided fossil fuel consumption by HELCO of 511,086 barrels of oil within its first 25-years of operation, along the climate benefits of zero associated greenhouse emissions and no air pollution. AES solar power today fulfills over 7% of Hawaii Island’s electricity requirements, and resulted in another HELCO first — a customer a rate decrease  and corresponding cost reduction in their monthly power bills, which are the highest power rates within the state.

Conclusion

If Hawaiian Electric is unable and/or unwilling to transition itself into a clean energy utility designed to serve the interests of the state’s residents and commercial interests in a period of rapid change and increasing climate challenges, then it’s time to open up Hawaii’s electricity market to better market options — one which is designed to serve the public interest, address the state’s energy self-sufficiency and climate sustainability needs, and do it before it’s too late…