A Titan Battle: Oil versus Climate

May 19, 2022/2 Comments/in Climate, Energy & Technology /by BeyondKona

Originally published May 14,2022

New oil and gas projects would produce 646 GtCO₂emissions, swallowing up the world’s entire carbon budget

Oil and gas majors are planning scores of vast projects that threaten to shatter the 1.5C climate goal. If governments do not act, these firms will continue to cash in as the world burns.

The world’s biggest fossil fuel firms are quietly planning scores of “carbon bomb” oil and gas projects that would drive the climate past internationally agreed temperature limits with catastrophic global impacts for all humanity.

An in-depth Guardian report finds global oil and gas firms are placing multibillion-dollar bets against humanity halting global heating. The exclusive data shows ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron and state-run fossil fuel giants Gazprom (Russia) and China’s National Petroleum Corporation are actively placing multibillion-dollar bets against humanity halting global heating. Their huge investments in new fossil fuel production could pay off only if countries fail to rapidly slash carbon emissions, which scientists say is vital.

The oil and gas industry is extremely volatile but extraordinarily profitable, particularly when prices are high, as they are at present. ExxonMobil, Shell, BP and Chevron have made almost $2tn in profits in the past three decades, while recent price rises led BP’s boss to describe the company as a “cash machine”.

The lure of colossal payouts in the years to come appears to be irresistible to the oil companies, despite the world’s climate scientists stating in February that further delay in cutting fossil fuel use would mean missing our last chance “to secure a livable and sustainable future for all”.

Experts have been warning since at least 2011 that most of the world’s fossil fuel reserves could not be burned without causing catastrophic global heating.

UN secretary general, António Guterres, warned world leaders in April: “Our addiction to fossil fuels is killing us.”

The fossil fuel industry’s short-term expansion plans involve the start of oil and gas projects that will produce greenhouse gases equivalent to a decade of CO2 emissions from China, the world’s biggest polluter.

These plans include 195 carbon bombs, gigantic oil and gas projects that would each result in at least a billion tons of CO2 emissions over their lifetimes, in total equivalent to about 18 years of current global CO2 emissions. About 60% of these new oil and gas projects have already started pumping.

The guardian reported that the 12 biggest oil companies are on track to spend over $1oo million every day for the rest of the decade on fossil fuel expansion.

The world’s scientists agree the planet is in deep trouble. In August, Guterres reacted strongly to a stark report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s leading authority on climate science. “The IPCC report is a code red for humanity,” he said.

The IPCC states carbon emissions must fall by half by 2030 to preserve the chance of a livable future, yet they show no sign of declining.

In May 2021, a report from the International Energy Agency, previously seen as a conservative body, concluded there could be no new oil or gas fields or coalmines if the world was to reach net zero by 2050.

In April, shocked by the latest IPCC report that said it was “now or never” to start slashing emissions, Guterres launched an outspoken attack on companies and governments whose climate actions did not match their words.

“Simply put, they are lying, and the results will be catastrophic,” Guterres said. “Investing in new fossil fuels infrastructure is moral and economic madness”. “Climate activists are sometimes depicted as dangerous radicals. But the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels.”

The Russia Factor

The reaction to Russia’s war in Ukraine has pushed oil and gas prices even higher, further incentivizing bets on new fields and infrastructure that would last decades.

The failure of countries to “build back greener” after the Covid-19 pandemic or the 2008 financial crash was not a good omen, and Guterres said: “Fossil fuel interests are now cynically using the war in Ukraine to lock in a high-carbon future.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin decreed on May 3 that no Russian entity would be allowed to make deals with those on the sanctions list, or even fulfil its obligations under existing deals.

Moscow has imposed sanctions on the owner of the Polish part of the Yamal pipeline that carries Russian gas to Europe, as well as the former German unit of the Russian gas producer Gazprom, whose subsidiaries service Europe’s gas consumption, impacting 29 Gazprom subsidiaries in Switzerland, Hungary, Britain, France, Bulgaria, the Benelux region, the United States, Switzerland, Romania and Singapore.

The United States, and the rest of the world

The U.S. is the leading source of potential emissions. Its 22 carbon bombs include conventional drilling and fracking, and span the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico to the foothills of the Front Range in Colorado to the Permian basin.

Together, new US project gas and oil projects have the potential to emit 140bn tons of CO2, almost four times more than the entire world emits each year.

Saudi Arabia is the second biggest potential emitter after the US, with 107bn tons, followed by Russia, Qatar, Iraq, Canada, China and Brazil. Australia, widely condemned by international leaders as a laggard in addressing the climate crisis, ranks 16th.

Carbon bombs

The term carbon bomb has been widely used in climate circles for the past decade to describe large fossil fuel projects or other big sources of carbon. The new research sets a specific definition: projects capable of pumping at least 1bn tons of CO2 emissions over their lifetimes.

The journal, Energy Policy, found that just a few months after many of the world’s politicians positioned themselves as climate leaders during the Cop26 conference in Glasgow, they were giving the green light to a massive global expansion of oil and gas production that scientists warn would push civilization to the brink, adding that 40% of planned gas and oil projects projects that had not yet started production must be stopped if the world was to avoid sliding ever more quickly towards catastrophe, adding they should be a prominent focus of the global climate protest movement in the months and years ahead.

Tyndall Centre of Climate Research, University of Manchester and Uppsala University, Sweden, said the scale of planned production in the face of all the evidence suggested big oil and its political supporters either did not believe the climate science or thought their extreme wealth could somehow protect them and their children from the devastating consequences.

“Either the scientists have spent 30 years working on this issue and have got it all wrong – the big oil CEOs know better – or, behind a veil of concern, they have complete disregard for the more climate vulnerable communities, typically poor, people of color and far away from their lives. Equally worrying, they are disinterested in their own children’s future.”

The Oil industry, awash with cash

BP’s chief financial officer, Murray Auchincloss, described things this way… “Certainly, it’s possible that we’re getting more cash than we know what to do with. For now, I’m going to be conservative and manage the company as if it’s $40 [a barrel] oil. Anything we could get above that just helps, obviously.” At the time, the oil price exceeded $90; today it is $106.”

Data obtained by the Guardian from the think tank Carbon Tracker shows a dozen of the world’s biggest companies are on track to commit a collective $387 million dollars a day of capital expenditure to exploiting oil and gas fields through to 2030. A significant portion of this capital outlay is for maintaining existing projects – some oil and gas will still be needed as the world weans itself off fossil fuels –the exact amount is not publicly available.

Nonetheless, it is clear that at least a quarter of this investment – $103m a day – is for oil and gas that cannot be burned if the worst impacts of the climate crisis are to be avoided, money that could instead be spent ramping up clean energy.

Even more worryingly, the companies have developed further project options that might lead them to spend an additional $84m a day that would not even be compatible with a devastating 2.7C of global heating.

“Companies that continue to develop projects based on business-as-usual demand are betting on the failure of policy action on climate and underestimating the disruptive potential of new technologies, such as renewables and battery storage,” said Mike Coffin at Carbon Tracker. “Such projects are either not needed or they lead to warming well in excess of Paris goals.”

A separate analysis based on Rystad Energy data from April, and after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, found that 20 of the world’s biggest oil and gas companies remained on course to spend huge sums – $932bn – by the end of 2030 developing new oil and gas fields.

A Costly Free Ride … just got more expensive

Freeing the world from the grip of fossil fuels is made far harder by huge ongoing subsidies for the fuels, making them far cheaper than their true cost when the damage they cause is included – especially air pollution, which kills 7 million people a year.

The G20 group of leading economies pledged in 2009 to phase out the subsidies but little has been achieved.
Hundreds of billions of dollars in direct financial support is received by the producers and consumers of fossil fuels every year – but they benefit from far larger subsidies by not paying for the harm burning fossil fuels causes.
When the damage from the climate crisis and air pollution is accounted for, the fossil fuel subsidies reach $6tn a year, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
The Guardian analysis shows oil and gas subsidies equivalent to $11m a minute globally, more than $1 million a minute in the United States — and American drivers complain about the high cost of fuel.
The US is also high on the list of the biggest per capita subsidies for all fossil fuels with $2,000 a year, behind only Saudi Arabia ($4,550) and Russia ($3,560). After these countries, only Iran ($1815) is ahead of Australia ($1730) and Canada ($1690).
“Taking the Paris agreement seriously requires a rapid shift away from fossil fuels,” said Simon Black, a climate economist at the IMF. “Getting fossil fuel prices right will help enormously in accelerating this transition.”

“The world is in a race against time,” said UN’s Guterres. “It’s time to end fossil fuel subsidies and stop the expansion of oil and gas exploration.”

Global Heating, Plastics, Pollution, and Overfishing Threaten Marine Life

May 7, 2022/1 Comment/in Climate /by BeyondKona

Scientists warned that a failure to curb carbon emissions may result in the extinction of most marine life, an emptying of the ocean last seen 250 million years ago amid a rapidly warming climate.

Accelerating greenhouse gas emissions could “culminate in a mass extinction rivaling those of Earth’s ancient past,” stated a peer-reviewed paper published Thursday in the journal Science. The reports also concluded that rising GHG emissions may cause a catastrophe, limiting temperature rise to 2° Celsius would reduce the risk by more than 70%, according to a study in the journal Science.

The oceans already have absorbed a third of global carbon emissions and 90 percent of the excess heat created by humans.

The vast expanse and forbidding ocean depths have until recently limited scientists to only a fundamental understanding of climate changes now underway impacting the earth’s marine ecosystems. Science, however, continues to expand the cause and effect understanding of human impacts on the planet and a greater understanding of what these changes represent to the marine creatures which call our oceans home, and also represent a significant food supply for humankind.

Not since an asteroid wiped out the dinosaurs has marine life been at such risk of extinction

The world has already warmed more than 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) since the preindustrial era, and last year the oceans contained more heat energy than at any point since record-keeping began six decades ago.

In a 2018 Princeton University study found, based on climate models which simulate the nearest example to today’s planetary warming, a future world similar to the late Permian Period of 250 million years ago when volcanic eruptions released huge quantities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

They found ocean surface temperatures increased by more than 10° C, triggering a nearly 80% decline in marine oxygen levels. An examination of the fossil record confirmed that oxygen-depleted warming seas killed off up to 96% of marine species.

The Permian Extinction Period — a roadmap of today’s warming oceans

Today, ocean temperatures are rising to record highs, and correspondingly, oxygen levels are falling. “The same mechanism that would be driving species losses from human-induced climate change has been shown to have caused extinction in the geologic past,” a recent Princeton study determined.

Many species are slowly suffocating as oxygen leaches out of the seas.

Even populations that have managed to withstand the ravages of overfishing, pollution and habitat loss are struggling to survive amid accelerating global heating from climate change.

If humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase, roughly a third of all marine animals could vanish…

Using climate models that predict the behavior of species based on simulated organism types, The study further found that the number of local marine disappearances of particular species, increases about 10 percent with every 1 degree Celsius of warming.

The researchers tested their models by using them to simulate a mass extinction at the end of the Permian period, when catastrophic warming triggered by volcanic eruptions wiped out roughly 90 percent of all life on Earth. Because the models successfully replicated the events of 250 million years ago, the scientists were confident in their predictions for what might happen in the foreseeable future.

The Princeton University research revealed that most animals can’t afford to lose much more than 50 percent of their habitat — beyond that number, a species tips into irreversible decline. In the worst-case emissions scenarios, the losses would be on par with the five worst mass extinctions in Earth’s history.

Cooking creatures literally within their habitat

These rising ocean temperatures are shifting the boundaries of marine creatures’ comfort zones. Many are fleeing northward in search of cooler waters, causing “extirpation” — or local disappearance — of once-common species.

The danger of warming is compounded by the fact that hotter waters start to lose dissolved oxygen — even though higher temperatures speed up the metabolisms of many marine organisms, so that they need more oxygen to live.

The ocean contains just one-sixtieth as much oxygen as the atmosphere, even less in warmer areas where water molecules are less able to keep the precious oxygen from bubbling back into the air. As global temperatures increase, that reservoir declines even further.

The heating of the sea surface also causes the ocean to stratify into distinct layers, making it harder for warmer, oxygenated waters above to mix with the cooler depths.

Deoxygenation poses one of the greatest climate threats to marine life. Scientists have documented expanding “shadow zones” where oxygen levels are so low that most life can’t survive.

This climate-driven marine die-off is just one piece of a broader biodiversity crisis gripping the entire globe.

A recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that warming has contributed to the disappearance of at least 400 species in the world’s oceans.

The scientist found that if global temperatures increase around 4.9° C by the end of the century and continue to rise, it would trigger mass extinction on par with the end of the Permian Period.

Under a low-emissions scenario that keeps temperature rise to 2° C, scientists project that extinction rates would range from about 4% – the natural rate – to 10%. “That’s still an awful lot of species in absolute numbers,” said Penn, noting that even absent climate change, the researchers estimated that 10% to 15% of species are at risk of extinction from the industrialization of the ocean and other human-caused threats.

Depleting global fish Stocks

“One big potential, and likely, impact will be the loss of ecosystem function in some marine ecosystems, and ecosystem cascading effects, even with only a small proportion of species lost,” said Butt, who studies the consequences of climate change on biodiversity and was not involved in the research.

For instance, the loss of a prey species could lead to declines in predators that regulate the health of marine ecosystems on which humans depend for food.

The paper noted that the regions of the ocean most vulnerable to climate-driven extinction are low-oxygen areas home to some of the world’s most productive fisheries.

“The projected impact of accelerating climate change on marine biota is profound, driving extinction risk higher and marine biological richness lower than has been seen in Earth’s history for the past tens of millions of years,” it concluded.

The Ocean is not a garbage dump or is it?

At least 14 million tons of plastic end up in the ocean every year, and plastic makes up 80% of all marine debris found from surface waters to deep-sea sediments. Marine species ingest or are entangled by plastic debris, which causes severe injuries and death, and people in turn eat the fish contaminated by oceans laden plastics.

An estimated 8 Million tons of plastic enters our oceans every year. There are 5.25 trillion pieces of plastic waste estimated to be in our oceans. 269,000 tons float, 4 billion microfibers per km² dwell below the surface. 70% of our debris sinks into the ocean’s ecosystem, 15% floats, and 15% lands on our beaches.

Fish in the North Pacific ingest 12,000 to 24,000 tons of plastic each year, which can cause intestinal injury and death and transfers plastic up the food chain to bigger fish, marine mammals and human seafood eaters.

A separate U.N. panel has found that about 1 million additional species are at risk of extinction as a result of overexploitation, habitat destruction, pollution and other human disruption of the natural world.

In an analysis for the publication Science that accompanied Princeton report, Rutgers ecologist Alexa Fredston compared marine animals to canaries in a coal mine, alerting humanity to invisible forces — such as dangerous carbon dioxide accumulation and ocean oxygen loss — that also threaten our ability to survive.

Fredston summed things this way, “If people can take action to preserve ocean wildlife, we will wind up saving ourselves.”

Hawaii’s Fresh Water Future: the essence of life

April 16, 2022/2 Comments/in Environment /by BeyondKona

Any sustainability conversation must include water, and all of its forms and uses. Taking this vital resource for granted has serious consequences for the future of Hawaii and its livability. As Dr. Richard Bennett explains, “…water is the essence of life and the media upon which our world and communities are entirely dependent.”

With a focus on Hawaii Island, the authors sum things up this way… “Hawaiʻi Island has a long history of drought episodes. We have dealt with these short-term events with various site-specific mitigations, however, any changes in how water is managed, allocated, and used, remain elusive and are often controversial.“

BeyondKona is pleased to present Richard H. Bennett Ph.D. and Rhiannon R. Tereari‘i Chandler-‘Īao, Esq. of Waiwai Ola ʻOhana, and their analysis of all things water for Hawaii…

Adding to the County of Hawaii’s Sustainability Conversation: Water, Law, and Policy

This paper advocates for a comprehensive approach to water use policy for Hawai‘i Island.

Water resource and use policies are scattered among several county departments and agencies without requiring the policies to be congruent or coordinated.

When we discuss sustainability, we look out into our future and ask what must be sustained if the natural world, our lives, and our economy will thrive without significant external inputs of money, energy, and resources.

Any sustainability conversation must include water and all of its forms and uses. Water is the essence of life and the media upon which our world and communities are entirely dependent.

This article is a conversation starter for a more comprehensive policy discussion of our water resources, no matter the source.

Changing Climate: There is an international scientific consensus that our climate is changing rapidly. The changes are attributed to human activities that have added insulating gases to the earthʻs atmosphere. How this change will impact specific locations is a matter of considerable scientific uncertainty. However, the recent historical record for Hawai‘i portends significant rainfall declines coincident with sea-level rise.

Many authors stress the issue of water resource sustainability, notably: “Given that approximately 70% of the annual rainfall happens during the wet season, Hawaiʻi is expected to face an overall reduction in annual rainfall leading to a decline in sustainability of groundwater recharge” (Burnett and Wada, 2014).

Rainfall for the state has declined about 14% overall.

Confounding this observation are drier and wetter trends for specific communities on all islands. Hawai’i Island’s leeward or Kona side appears to be drier than any statewide trend may suggest. Wisdom and prudence declare that we must assume the worst-case scenario and plan accordingly. We will be pleasantly surprised should heavier rainfall occur from year to year. In contrast, being shocked and unprepared when protracted drought occurs might inspire emergency restrictions that serve only as band-aids.

Fresh Water: Our water reservoir is a finite underground bubble that floats on the more dense seawater saturating the fractured rock beneath the island. This bubble or lens is rainfall and dew dependent. There is no underground river of fresh water that flows underground, as occurs in some states and aquifers of the mainland.

Our rainfall dependency is also confounded by the time of a rain event until that water joins the lens. Unlike a lake reservoir, this latency of the water volume can make effective water use planning difficult and provide an illusion of water abundance. This raises the question of how best to determine the sustainable yield and limits of our water resource.

Home Water Use: There are many options for reducing in-home water use. Most of these are structural, such as low flow fixtures and appliances.

The most significant use of water in the home is landscape irrigation. Plant species selection and effective irrigation management can save 30-50% of the water used outside the home. The Board of Water Supply for the City and County of Honolulu states that with the proper choices, a homeowner can save 30 to 50% of the water used on landscaping (2021 Board of Water Supply, City and County of Honolulu). This option conserves water, reduces the family water bill, and addresses multiple crucial sustainability issues.

Irrigation water conservation programs must be an essential component of any sustainability effort for Hawaii. Water conserved for other domestic demands will be far less expensive than increasing pumping capacity, and the energy to drive that capacity, for additional water.

Redirecting the best quality wastewater from sinks, showers, and washing machines can replace 30 to 40% of the water needs for landscaping. Many nations and communities in the arid parts of the world reuse water by necessity and mandate.

The challenge for Hawaii County is how best to achieve sustainable policies and water conservation education. The Department of Water Supply is not noted for progressive water conservation policies or effective public education. A change in policy and programmatic efforts will likely require enlightened leadership and engagement from the Mayor Roth and the County Council to effect significant water conservation measures. However, the most significant impediments to greywater reuse are state and local regulations that are onerous, out-of-date and not science-based, and, in some cases, make greywater reuse illegal.

Wastewater Reuse: Hawai‘i Island has several wastewater treatment plants. Some are public; most are private. By statute, our communities may have a typical sewer system into which all wastewater is combined. Toilet water is mixed with sink, shower, and laundry water, and as such, it all becomes “Black Water.” This water must be treated to reduce its pollutant loads and disinfected to reduce the prevalence of presumptive disease-causing microbes. This treatment process is expensive to construct and operate. The proper disposal of the treated wastewater is costly and especially problematic for an island in which sewer connections are more the exception than the norm.

Water inexorably flows downhill to the sea. On the Hilo side, about 212 rivers and streams flow continuously, allowing people to see the hydrologic cycle in action. The Wailuku River in Hilo is a dramatic example. Its watershed is a vast mountainside. Heavy rains create a torrent of brown water carrying dirt and fine sediments into Hilo Bay. Less apparent are the urban drainages of the Waiākea and Wailoa rivers. A drive through Hilo town reveals many storm drains and gutters that convey street rain runoff to these rivers and the bay.

In figure 3, Kona’s Subterranean Estuary is depicted as a model of the water flowing from land-to-sea.

There is only one storm water channel in the Kona area that drains Holualoa mauka. Most rainfall runoff migrates underground and joins the subterranean estuary that flows under the entire Kona plain.

University of Hawaiʻi hydrologists suggest the brackish ground water flows into the sea at the rate of about 2.5 million gallons per mile of coastline, per day (Peterson 2009).

As apparent in this illustration, all water eventually flows into the sea. In some cases by design, and others by default, as is the case with Hawaii Island’s wastewater plant injection wells. In both situations, the law requires all such disposal to be subject to disposal permit requirements to ensure that the nearshore waters are not impaired.

The wastewater of the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant is a glaring example of water resource mismanagement and nearshore pollution. For over 20 years about 1.8 million gallons a day of partially treated wastewater is dumped in a pit 0.7 of a mile from Honokohau Harbor. At least ten scientific studies document how this water flows seaward, in our subterranean estuary, polluting the harbor and the ocean. A plan that was funded by the EPA in 1993 required the reuse of the water for irrigation.

Over 20+ years, 13 billion gallons of wastewater were indirectly dumped into the sea while government agencies looked the other way. The water could be used today to irrigate the recreation areas at the Old Airport. Our limited freshwater is used instead in what is nothing more than multi-agency myopia.

Water Policy: The sustainability of our water resources is the kingpin for just about every other sustainability issue. The County of Hawaii and the DWS (water department) must coalesce to implement a whole range of sustainable water policies and practices. Without ample high-quality water for all, at affordable prices, sustainability becomes moot. It is time to become proactive, pick the can up and fix these problems, rather than continue to kick the can down the road of climate resiliency.

In aggregate, storm water runoff and cesspool leachate are the most significant pollutant loads that impair the coastal ecosystem. We must also redesign our communities to manage these waters effectively. Thinking outside the box is not enough. The box itself must be redesigned.

Public Trust: Article XI, section 1 of Hawai‘i’s Constitution establishes that “all public natural resources are held in trust by the State for the benefit of the people,” and Article XI, section 7 of Hawai‘i’s Constitution specifically references water and includes the directive “to protect, control, and regulate the use of Hawai‘i’s water resources for the benefit of its people.” Article XI, section 7 also establishes the State Commission on Water Resource Management (Water Commission), which is currently housed within the Department of Land and Natural Resources. As provided in our State Constitution, all of the state’s resources shall be managed in the “Public Trust.”

Today, “the people of [Hawaii] have elevated the public trust doctrine to the level of a constitutional mandate.”[1] Pursuant to the Constitution, Water Code, and common law, the “state water resources trust” applies to “all water resources without exception or distinction.

[1] Waiāhole I, 94 Hawai‘i 97, 131, 9 P.3d 409, 443 (2000).

The counties and the legislature have largely ignored this doctrine while enacting its business. Embracing this “Trust” will carry us effectively toward a sustainable future.

Sustainability means designing the future from the future, and nothing is more important than water. This is the place to begin.

Hu Honua: Fourteen Facts You Should Know; and more

April 2, 2022/1 Comment/in Climate, Energy & Technology /by Tawn Keeney MD, Guest Contributor

Hawaii’s Public Utility Commission is scheduled to render a decision on Hu Honua before June 30th, a decision that will likely set the course for this now idle power plant’s unsustainable and uneconomic future.

BeyondKona has provided our readers in depth coverage and expert analysis on Hu Honua; spanning three years and 17 articles (available through a site search: “Hu Honua”). This idle, highly subsidized, and certainly controversial biomass powerplant is located in Pepeekeo, Hawaii Island.

We are fortunate to have one of our island’s community elders, Tawn Keeney MD, a notable physician and who has served his community of Honokaa for over 36 years, share with BeyondKona and its readers his research and insights into Hu Honua: Fourteen Facts You Should Know, and more... one the most important and locally divisive issues in Hawaii Island’s recent energy history.

Hu Honua is a ‘Bioenergy’ facility, almost built, in Pepeekeo built to burn chipped whole green trees and in turn generate electricity. Those trees are the Eucalyptus plantation in Hamakua owned by Kamehameha Schools, Parker Ranch, and the State and County managed forests in upper Waiakea and Pahala.

In the Hu Honua Power Purchase Agreement testimony before the PUC, September 2021, Hawaii’s Consumer Advocate, representing the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, concluded (see excerpts) the following, “…approval of the (Hu Honua) A&R PPA (Power Purchase Agreement) does not seem reasonable or in the public interest at this time.” and “Otherwise, without additional justification, there are GHG emissions, environmental, health, and customer impact concerns that do not support a favorable ruling by the Commission”.

The PUC process to date has illuminated the issues and conclusions specific to Hu Honua:

1. Burning wood (green trees) for generation of electricity is climate and environmentally destructive.

2. The cost of electricity to the Hawaii Island ratepayer will increase significantly if Hu Honua is authorized to sell electricity to Hawaiian Electric.

3. Authorization of Hu Honua will not add to Hawaii’s energy security or self sufficiency as after the initial timber 7 year harvest cycle, the great majority of the wood supply will be imported from Asia or the American continent — trading one of Hawaii’s imported energy fuel production dependencies for another.

4. Bioenergy (burning green forests for electricity) is scientifically discredited and such energy stations will close due to governmental withdrawal of subsidies and support as the climate crisis overtakes the convenience of considering burning trees for ENERGY desirable.

What you need to know about Hu Honua

Fact #1 GHG Emissions: Contrary to Hu Honua’s advertising, this facility’s energy is not ‘clean’. Hu Honua’s Clean Air Permit from the State Department of Health designates that the facility will emit 293,000 tons of Greenhouse Gas per year. This is approaching 1000 tons GHG per day.

Fact #2 Fuel Inefficiencies – It is well known that burning chipped or pelletized green trees as fuel for generating electricity releases 1.5x more greenhouse gas than burning coal for each KWh of electricity produced. The IPCC Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2006) identifies 1.25x greater GHG ‘in the smokestack’ emissions burning wood than coal (the dirtiest of all conventional fossil fuels) . The ‘efficiency’ of burning wood is 26% and the efficiency of coal is 33% in generating electricity, thus calculating the 1.5x factor.

Fact #3 Dirty Fuel – Burning wood for electricity releases 1.5x more Greenhouse Gas than burning Coal, 2.2x more GHG than burning oil, and 3x more GHG than burning natural gas, per kilowatt hour of electricity generated.

The Greenhouse Gas Analysis presented to the PUC by Hu Honua in 2019 calculates their GHG emissions to be 1.95 tons CO2(e) per KWh electricity generated, compared with 0.91 tons for the fossil fuel stations they would be replacing, or more than twice the level of GHG emissions and pollutants Hu Honua was intended to replace in Hawaii Island fossil fuel power sources.

Fact #4 Trees, Not Sustainable – Hu Honua has proposed that regrowth of the trees that it has harvested will eventually re-sequester the Carbon released into the atmosphere and thereby achieve carbon neutrality. Contemporary research (8 minute Youtube video) suggests that, following clear cut harvest of forested lands (the harvest method that would be employed by Hu Honua), in addition to the emissions of burning the trees, those harvested lands will continue to be a net emitter of CO2 into the atmosphere, resulting from release of stored soil carbon, for as long as 20 years. Hu Honua proposes a 7 year re-harvest cycle.

In a Star Advertiser editorial, Hu Honua’s forestry contractor argued that the stumps will regrow trees as coppice and soil carbon will be preserved. However, Kamehameha Schools, owning the majority of Hu Honua’s trees has publicly stated they will not regrow their forests. No public commitment has been made by Parker Ranch to regrow its trees.

Fact #5 Emissions Impacts, not Rewards – The Government of Canada’s website < Bioenergy Greenhouse Gas Calculator > is the only internet site found which calculates the accumulated greenhouse gas over time from burning green trees for power in relation to burning coal, oil and natural gas. It factors into its results the re-sequestration of CO2 from regrowth of harvested trees or planting new trees.

The Canadian government website allows designation of speed of growth of the trees and the distance of transport of harvested trees to the power generating facility. Factoring ‘fast growing trees’ and 50 kilometers (30 miles) average transport (Pahala, Waiakea Mauka and Waipio rim to Pepe’ekeo) this Calculator shows that, for Hu Honua, the accumulated Greenhouse gas from burning trees for power (including the sequestration from regrowth of trees) will be greater than burning Coal for at least 70 years (best case scenario).

Fact #6 EPA on Trees for Power – Twice (in 2012 and 2019) the EPA has asked its Science Advisory Board for endorsement of its bioenergy GHG neutrality policy. The SAB on both occasions refused the request, stating the “feedstock and timeframe for carbon neutrality must be specified”. Burning harvested invasive species or wood waste from industrial processes would be carbon neutral, as otherwise the wood would decompose.

Hu Honua will be clear cutting whole Big Island green forests in an unsustainable mission to burn trees for power. Burning green trees could, over a time frame of several decades to a century or more, be carbon neutral depending on the time to regenerate the woody mass, plus harvest and transport emissions.

https://tinyurl.com/4ttrtc8h https://tinyurl.com/434a7ysd

Though it is not official policy, references have suggested that EPA’s timeframe reference for carbon neutrality of bioenergy is one typical life-cycle of forest trees, or approximately one hundred years. In respect to the current Climate Crisis, this timeframe reference is inappropriate.

Fact #7: Not Carbon or Renewable – In order to call Bioenergy ‘renewable’ or ‘carbon neutral’ federal statute and EPA directive requires that any forest harvested for that purpose must be regrown. It does not allow that forest can be grown someplace else, or other forested lands can be purchased to compensate for harvested forest. Kamehameha Schools has publicly stated that the 12,000 acres of forests on their lands will not be regrown.

Thus, Hu Honua should stop calling it’s bioenergy ‘renewable’ or ‘carbon neutral’. As quoted in Pacific Business news, Warren Lee, President and CEO of Hu Honua seems to acknowledge that Hu Honua should not be considered as sourcing renewable energy. “The plant’s purpose was to replace fossil fuel generation, not renewable energy.”, Lee recently told PBN, noting that it is not an either/or situation and both bioenergy and renewables can each play a part in diversifying the state’s overall energy portfolio mix.”

Fact #8: Local Tree Sources Unsustainable – Kamehameha Schools, Hu Honua’s largest source of trees, will not regrow trees after the initial harvest, the first of 7-year harvest cycles for the 30 year contract. No public commitment has been made to regrowth from Parker Ranch, the other large source. No other large scale Hawaiian Islands fuel source has been identified.

DLNR has stated they will plant or ‘protect’ 100 million trees by 2030 for carbon sequestration or environmental restoration. They will not allow harvest. Hu Honua’s wood will come as pellets from the Americas or Asia. ‘Bioenergy’ will not contribute to Hawaii’s ‘energy self-sufficiency’ or security. A forest industry will not emerge.

Fact #9: Ratepayers Get A Raw Deal – Hu Honua has designated that it will sell electricity to Hawaiian Electric at $0.22 per KWh, increasing gradually to above $0.30 per KWh over the 30 year contract. Hawaii Island’s planned and already begun large solar (with storage) installations will sell their power to Hawaiian Electric at $0.08 per KWh, approximately one third of what Hu Honua will charge. As a result of Hu Honua, the Hawaii Island ratepayer will pay more for their electricity.

Fact #10: Hawaii’s Consumer Advocate Agrees – The Consumer Advocate, representing the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, testified to the PUC in September 2021 that over the 30 year life of the Hu Honua project, 58% of the electricity generation at Hu Honua would replace zero-emission renewable sources (wind, solar or geothermal) and 42% would be fossil fuels.

Fact #11: Polluting Supply Chain – Hu Honua will send 5 to 6 logging trucks per hour each way from Hamakua to Pepe’ekeo or from Pahala and Waiakea through Hilo to Pepe’ekeo. That is approximately one truck (approaching 40 tons) will be sent every 11 minutes for burning trees (a truck, loaded or empty, will pass an observer every 5 to 6 minutes). Traffic problems, road and bridge deterioration, and probably accidents will arise.

Fact #12: Water Wasted or Waste Water – Hu Honua’s engineering designated that 21 million gallons per day of cooling water would be withdrawn from Hakalau Aquifer, heated to 88 degrees F, various chemicals added (primarily 45 gallons per day of descaling agent) and re-injected into the aquifer 90 ft. from the shoreline, and that transit to the ocean would take 50 days. This calculates to 1 billion gallons (15,000 Olympic swimming pools) of heated contaminated water in the aquifer at steady state.

Because of failure of the injection wells to perform as anticipated, the depth of the wells was increased from 400 to 800 ft.

At that time the Department of Water Supply wrote a letter to the Health Department Safe Drinking Water Branch stating, “The Department of Water Supply (DWS) has concerns with respect to the Pumping and UIC permits that would allow Hu Honua to proceed with large scale (21.6 Million Gallons per day) pumping of groundwater and reinjection of that water back into the groundwater with select chemicals near DWS’ potable groundwater wells.” “DWS requests that Hu Honua be required to provide, at their expense: 1) Groundwater modeling that includes DWS’ Pepe’ekeo groundwater sources. 2) A determination that Hu Honua’s pumping and UIC process will not have adverse impacts on the quantity and quality of DWS’ nearby sources. 3) A Monitoring plan for tracking water level and detecting select contaminants at DWS’ nearby sources.” A subsequent letter reiterated those concerns and broadened stipulations.

Though Hu Honua has deepened their wells, first to 800 ft. and now to 1200 ft, no public presentation of engineering plans or the above requested modeling have been made available to the public. Still 21 million gpd (equivalent to the basal outflow of Waipio Valley) will be pumped and heated through this facility and re-injected. The above stipulations from DWS must be enforced and made public. The Maui Wastewater US Supreme Court ruling demands that an NPDES study be performed to ensure no deterioration of the nearshore marine environment.

Fact #13: Trading Trees-for-Power Fails Original Expectations – The current drift in biomass policy and media discussions suggests, because of the reasons pointed out by the 500 scientists, that within the next several years all subsidies and RPS considerations of biomass as carbon neutral will be withdrawn.

From National Geographic, November, 2021, we find the following statement under the Tagline: “As world leaders pledge more action on climate change, one so-called solution—burning trees for electricity—could undermine progress.” That statement: “In the European Union’s “Fit for 55” framework for reducing emissions by 55 percent by 2030, biomass energy is still labeled as carbon neutral. But in a report published in 2018, the U.K.’s (the world’s largest per capita user of bioenergy) Committee on Climate Change said biomass energy should be limited. The country has contracts extending subsidies through 2027, but when they end, the committee discouraged further use.”

The unfolding realities of the climate crisis will overtake the convenient economic considerations of bioenergy as Greenhouse Gas neutral. Subsidies will be withdrawn. This will lead to closure of most, if not all, bioenergy stations.

Fact #14: A Community United in its Opposition to Hu Honua – The following public organizations are in opposition to Hawaii’s first proposed Bioenergy (green tree burning) facility, Hu Honua.

In stated opposition are

Sierra Club (Hawaii Chapter), Sierra Club (Moku Loa Group),
Surfrider Foundation, Olohana Foundation,
Partnership for Policy Integrity,
Pepeekeo Fisherman’s Association,
North Hawaii Action Network,
Na Kupuna O Moku O Keawe,
Life of the Land,
350Hawaii,
Hawaii Island Citizen’s Climate Lobby,
Hui Aloha Aina,
Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action,
Hawaiian Cultural Center of Hamakua, Environmental Caucus (Democratic Party of Hawaii),
Climate Reality Project,
Hawaii’s Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, Division of Consumer Advocacy (‘Consumer Advocate’),
the Democratic Party of Hawaii and more.

In May, 2018 the State Democratic Party overwhelmingly passed Resolution ENV: 2018-08: “Resolved, That The Democratic Party of Hawai’i urges the Public Utilities Commission, all elected and appointed officials of the State of Hawai’i and its various counties to withdraw support for Hu Honua Bioenergy, and any successors, which will have irreversible and deleterious consequences for the state’s coastal waters and the planet’s atmosphere;”

After years of litigation, public testimony and lawsuits… it isn’t over yet…

The Hu Honua story has been a long and winding road and exemplified by propositions, applications, questionable agreements, and certainly accompanied by a contentious multi-year history of lawsuits and hearings before Hawaii’s PUC and the state’s court system.

Life of Land’s recent intervenor submission before the PUC summed up Hu Honua’s application-to-proceed this way:

“The long and litigious history of the Hu Honua project is characterized by the competing interests of a mysterious and powerful corporate entity and those of the ratepayers and people of Hawai‘i. On one hand, Hu Honua is seeking to force through the approval of an expensive power-purchase agreement (“PPA”) for a 19th century-era wood-burning technology that will deplete and pollute Hawai‘i’s natural resources and increase the cost of electricity for the people of Hawai‘i Island, all in the name of corporate profits.

On the other hand, the HELCO ratepayers and the public interest of the people of Hawai‘i are being protected by a robust framework of environmental laws and the reasoned analysis of the Hawai‘i Public Utilities Commission. As Hawai‘i (and the world) confront the escalating climate emergency, these laws, and the agencies and entities that wield them, represent the main arbiter tasked with balancing the complex and often competing needs that constitute the “public interest.”

We live at a time when there is no room for compromise in our fight to preserve our environment and our species. Climate Change has become ‘Code Red’. It is the judgment of science, our environmentalists and, slowly, leadership that burning green trees for generation of electricity is climate and environmentally destructive.

The problems of burning trees-for-power are not confined to Hawaii

The following are excerpts from a letter signed by 500 expert scientists in Feb. 2021 to leaders of the US, EU, Japan and Korea regarding Bioenergy: See letter here.

(Please access the above link to see this entire letter and the impressive credentials of the signatories, which includes a former chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, US National medal of Science winner, President of the European Academies of Science, Lead author of 5 IPCC technical reports on bioenergy, etc.)

“The undersigned scientists and economists commend each of you for the ambitious goals you have announced for the United States, the European Union, Japan and South Korea to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. Forest preservation and restoration should be key tools for achieving this goal and simultaneously helping to address our global biodiversity crisis. We urge you not to undermine both climate goals and the world’s biodiversity by shifting from burning fossil fuels to burning trees to generate energy.”

“In recent years, there has been a misguided move to cut down whole trees or to divert large portions of stem wood for bioenergy, releasing carbon that would otherwise stay locked up in forests.”

“The result of this additional wood harvest is a large initial increase in carbon emissions …. As numerous studies have shown, this burning of wood will increase warming for decades to centuries. That is true even when the wood replaces coal, oil or natural gas.”

“Overall, for each kilowatt hour of heat or electricity produced, using wood initially is likely to add two to three times as much carbon to the air as using fossil fuels.”

“Government subsidies for burning wood create a double climate problem because this false solution is replacing real carbon reductions. Companies are shifting fossil energy use to wood, which increases warming, as a substitute for shifting to solar and wind, which would truly decrease warming.”

Great Barrier Reef, Widespread Bleaching; Again

March 18, 2022/0 Comments/in Climate /by BeyondKona

“What is most concerning is that this widespread bleaching is happening during a La Niña weather event, which is normally characterised by rain and cloud cover on the east coast of Australia often helping to cool waters. It shows the consistent pressure our reef is now under from global heating.”

Dead coral found at Great Barrier Reef as widespread bleaching event unfolds

“What is most concerning is that this widespread bleaching is happening during a La Niña weather event, which is normally characterized by rain and cloud cover on the east coast of Australia often helping to cool waters. It shows the consistent pressure our reef is now under from global heating.”

Dead corals are now being recorded in aerial surveys across the Great Barrier Reef in what the marine park’s chief scientist says is a widespread and serious bleaching event on the world heritage icon. Aerial surveys have covered half of the 2,300km reef, with the worst bleaching observed in the park’s central region off Townsville, where corals on some reefs are dead and dying. The unfolding bleaching comes ahead of a 10-day UN monitoring mission to the reef due to start on Monday.

Sixth mass bleaching event is now unfolding on the reef, adding to events in 1998, 2002, 2016, 2017 and 2020.

Dr David Wachenfeld, chief scientist at the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, told Guardian Australia: “There is certainly a risk we are seeing a mass bleaching event.

Aerial surveys from helicopters that started last Saturday have revealed mild to moderate bleaching driven by rising ocean temperatures on reefs in the remote far north, with the most badly hit reefs across a 250km stretch to the north and south of Townsville.

Most reefs in that central region, between Hinchinbrook Island and Bowen, were severely bleached and there were still sections of the great barrier reef marine ecosystem not yet surveyed there.

Bleaching is considered minor if less than 10% of corals on an individual reef are bleached. Levels up to 30% are categorized as moderate, up to 60% is major and beyond that, bleaching is considered severe.

“The fact that at the very least, most reefs are severely bleached – this is a very serious event. There is no question about that. Some of the observations in that region have been of coral mortality. “That is where the heat stress has been worst. We haven’t yet surveyed all that area, but I would expect that situation of most reefs being severely bleached would go north and south of Bowen.” Aerial surveys started while the heat stress was still building across large parts of the reef. Wachenfeld said rather than wait until the heat had peaked, the flights had started because “we are starting to see coral die.”

When a coral bleaches, the transparent flesh and white skeleton are easy to see from the air. But if it dies, the flesh begins to rot and is quickly taken over by algae which is darker in color. “You then can’t see from the air that a living coral was there a week ago,” said Wachenfeld.

In the remote north, Wachenfeld said some reefs had not recovered from a severe 2016 bleaching event. Reports this week’s flights indicated little live coral left. “It’s a major stress event for corals even if they don’t die from it. There is no historical record of such stress events happening so frequently. At the moment, what we see is widespread and in some parts it is severe and that is worrying. There is no doubt about it,” Dr. Britta Schaffelke, director of Great Barrier Reef research at the Australian Institute of Marine Science, said.

Richard Leck, head of oceans at WWF Australia, said bleaching was directly attributable to global heating caused by rising greenhouse gas emissions. “Reducing Australia’s domestic and exported emissions fast, this decade, is the main solution within our control,” he said.

The environment group released analysis on Friday showing that for Australia to be part of efforts to keep global heating to 1.5C, the country should release no more than 4bn tons of CO2 between now and mid-century.

But the analysis, carried out by scientists, said the Morrison government’s current strategy to reach net zero would release 9.6bn tons. “We’re going to blow our emissions budget by more than double,” said Leck. Greenpeace Australia climate impacts campaigner Martin Zavan said: “This latest bleaching event has once again exposed the Morrison government’s failure to protect the Great Barrier Reef, throwing billions at band-aid measures while failing to address climate change, the biggest driver of catastrophic coral damage.”

Dr Zebedee Nicholls, one of the scientists that carried out the analysis, said: “The science is clear: the outlook for coral reefs around the world is bad at 1.5C, and their fate is all but sealed at 2C.”

Kelly O’Shanassy, chief executive of the Australian Conservation Foundation, said: “If the federal government is serious about its claim of wanting to protect the Great Barrier Reef it must rapidly phase out coal, oil and gas and stop encouraging the growth of fossil fuel industries.”

What is most concerning is that this widespread bleaching is happening during a La Niña weather event, which is normally characterized by rain and cloud cover on the east coast of Australia often helping to cool waters. It shows the consistent pressure our reef is now under from global heating.

New U.N. Climate Report; time’s up

February 28, 2022/1 Comment/in Climate /by BeyondKona

Five things you should know about the U.N. climate report released today

The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change today released a sweeping report on the dangerous effects that rising global temperatures are already having — and the catastrophes that loom if humanity fails to make swift and significant cuts to planet-warming emissions.

Before spending hours poring over the more than a 3,500-page document full of devastating details, in the following you’ll discover five key take-away points and summary findings worth your time, and understanding.

1. Some climate effects are already baked in

Humanity has pumped more than a trillion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere since the late 19th century, fueling an average global temperature rise of more than 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to preindustrial levels.

Even if those emissions were to stop tomorrow, they have already set in motion some unavoidable effects across the globe.

Fish are dying in oceans that have heated up and become more acidic. Climate disasters such as supercharged wildfires, hurricanes and floods have claimed lives and ravaged communities.

Even if humanity meets the more ambitious goal of the Paris agreement — limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels — scientists project the demise of most coral reefs and the irreversible loss of glaciers and polar ice by the end of the century.

2. It’s not too late to prevent some of the potential suffering

Despite these irreversible effects, the report emphasizes that humanity still has time to act to stave off more suffering in the future.

In addition to mitigation, which involves making deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say humanity must make significant investments in adaptation, which entails coping with the consequences of a warming Earth. For example, investments in infrastructure would reduce the damage inflicted by extreme weather. And investments in public health would prevent the spread of diseases such as malaria and dengue fever, which have flourished as the world warms and mosquitoes roam beyond their current habitats.

Scientists estimate that for every dollar spent on resilience and adaptation, countries could save at least $4 over time.

3. Warming is widening inequities between rich and poor nations

Many developing countries have released little carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, yet they are most vulnerable to the effects of the climate crisis. The report makes clear that these inequities will persist as the world warms.

Even under moderate scenarios for sea-level rise, the coastlines of most Pacific Island nations would be flooded. And under the worst-case scenario for global temperature rise, Africa — which is historically responsible for less than 3 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions — would see a 118-fold increase in exposure to extreme heat. By contrast, heat exposure in Europe would increase only fourfold.

So far, wealthy countries have failed to fulfill their promise to provide $100 billion annually to help poor nations green their economies and adapt to climate effects. Developed nations will probably face intense pressure to deliver on this pledge at the next U.N. climate summit in Egypt in November.

4. The climate crisis is intertwined with the biodiversity crisis

Global warming is already threatening plants and animals by shifting seasonal weather patterns and intensifying habitat-destroying disasters. If global temperatures rise by 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), 10 percent of all plant and animal species could face a high risk of extinction, the report says.

At 3.2 Celsius (5.8 Fahrenheit), a quarter of all salamanders could go extinct. By 4 Celsius (7.2 Fahrenheit), half of the Amazon rainforest could be lost.

5. The time to act is now

For all of the sobering statistics in the report, its overarching message is not one of hopelessness, but of urgency to act, our colleagues Brady and Sarah write.

Humanity still has a limited window to overhaul the way energy is generated, the way cities are designed and the way food is grown — changes that ultimately could save trillions of dollars and millions of lives.

“These are projections, they are not predictions,” Patrick Gonzalez, a lead author of the report and a climate scientist at the University of California at Berkeley, told our colleagues of the findings. “It’s all based on humans and our actions. The future is something we can change.”

IPCC Climate Report – Summary findings:

Even as isolated Hawaii as may be, the state cannot escape the climate change impacts reported in the IPCC report now underway.

Climate change has caused substantial damages, and increasingly irreversible losses, in terrestrial, freshwater and coastal and open ocean marine ecosystems (vetted report conclusion: high confidence).
The extent and magnitude of climate change impacts are larger than estimated in previous assessments (vetted report conclusion: high confidence).
Widespread deterioration of ecosystem structure and function, resilience and natural adaptive capacity, as well as shifts in seasonal timing have occurred due to climate change (vetted report conclusion: high confidence),
…with adverse socioeconomic consequences (vetted report conclusion: high confidence).
Approximately half of the species assessed globally have shifted polewards or, on land, also to higher elevations (vetted report conclusion: very high confidence).
Hundreds of local losses of species have been driven by increases in the magnitude of heat extremes (vetted report conclusion: high confidence),
…as well as mass mortality events on land and in the ocean (vetted report conclusion: very high confidence) and
loss of kelp forests (vetted report conclusion: high confidence).

Some of these documented losses are already irreversible, such as the first species extinctions now being driven by climate change.

Ipcc Climate Report 2022 1

Hawaii Prepares To Go All Electric

February 17, 2022/0 Comments/in Climate /by BeyondKona

Hawaii’s 2022 legislative season, now in session has been marked a record number of bill submissions addressing the forthcoming electrification of personal and commercial ground transportation, as in battery electric vehicles (BEV). Equally remarkable are the number transformative bills directed at addressing climate change, renewable energy, and environmental protection.

According to then state’s leading electric vehicle group, Hawaii Electric Vehicle Association, and there are over 43 separate House and Senate bills addressing EVs (electric vehicles), in one form or another, ranging from the state guidelines and incentives to assist the build out of a multi-island BEV public charging infrastructure to addressing equity (affordability) issues, with BEV financial incentives directed to Hawaii’s low-to-moderate income residents.

For definitive look at the BEV related bills now under Hawaii state legislative consideration visit: https://hawaiiev.org/2022-ev-legislation

A National EV Charging Infrastructure is also Coming to Hawaii

Senator Brian Schatz’s office reported earlier this week of new Federal Funding being allocated to Hawaii in the form of $2.6 million funding grant. the money is part of $5 Billion immediate Federal funds release for the intended build out of national EV charging network. Funding details are available on DOT’s web site: https://highways.dot.gov/newsroom/president-biden-usdot-and-usdoe-announce-5-billion-over-five-years-national-ev-charging

The $5B Federal funds release represents about 2/3 of the total $7 Billion allocated to BEV charging infrastructure in the bi-partisan infrastructure bill passed last year.

For Hawaii, here some of the high points;

1) The state has until August (this year) to submit its deployment and use of funds plan to DOT. The earlier Hawaii responds, the earlier the funds will be distributed to the state.

2) The funds may only be applied to charging station build-outs on so-called designated Alternative Fuel Corridors, i.e., federal roads within the state. All of the state’s primary populated islands have qualifying roads. In other words, state parks, shopping malls, etc. do not qualify in this initial round of Federal funding.

3) The funding is a 80/20 package, meaning private partners participating in the state’s build out plan, e.g., HECO will be required to pay 20% of their project participation costs. The balance (80%) is covered within federal funding and administered by the state.

4) Questions as to the charging speed, type of charging, and locations for deployment are yet to be determined. The state, and its private sector partners, are to submit a final funding plan by August, which is then subject to final approval by DOT, before the $2.6 million Federal is released to the state — and all of which is scheduled to occur this year.

A National EV Charging Infrastructure

The new National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula (NEVI) Program was established by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed by Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden last November
The U.S. Departments of Transportation and Energy also announced this week nearly $5 billion will be made available to help states create a network of EV charging stations along the Interstate Highway System and designated “alternative fuel corridors.” Funds can be used to install and operate EV charging stations
There is currently 41K BEV charging stations compared to 136K gas stations with greater fueling capacity in terms of the number of vehicles fueled at one time and time for fueling.
The Federal funding goal is to develop a nationwide highway network of 500,000 EV charging stations by 2030.
There are 116,000 public charging ports / 41,000 stations across the country, according to the Energy Department — mostly lower-speed “Level 2” chargers that are heavily concentrated in California. Cost estimates for installing chargers vary widely. Tesla has proposed the government cap costs at $75,000 per port, which would mean 80,000 chargers with the new federal funding and matching state dollars.
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials suggested the new federal funding was an opportunity to ensure prices for charging are listed in terms of kilowatts per hour and to require that charging can be paid with credit and debit cards, rather than through an account with charging providers. (the latter is a long overdue recommendation)
Various groups disagree about the proximity of chargers. A group of Western state transportation departments said the current 50-mile standard was hard to meet in rural areas. But the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents major carmakers, said the distance should be closer to offer convenience similar to filling up at a gas station.
The federal government will consider a particular corridor fully built out when it has at least four 150-kilowatt charging points every 50 miles, with limited exceptions. Once states meet that goal, they can use their remaining money for other charging projects (potentially faster charging DC power options).

“People want to purchase EVs, but they worry about where and when they’ll be able to charge their car. By building EV charging stations across the state in places where people can actually use them, this new federal funding will make EVs more accessible for Hawaii families, create quieter streets, and help the State of Hawaii achieve its ambitious goals for building a clean economy,” said Hawaii’s Brian Schatz, who presently chairs the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development.

Auto Dealers and Retailer Outlets Apprehensive

Analysts say higher prices at the dealership represent a conflict rather than a conversance of interests as to role of dealerships in the future of BEV sales. For legacy auto manufacturers, this is a problem only now surfacing and could very well slow expansion of the nation’s nascent BEV sector.

While climate scientists continue to present evidence as to the urgent need to eliminate carbon emissions from transportation, many traditional auto dealers see EV’s as a threat to their livelihood.

Sticker prices for hybrid and electric vehicles have fallen significantly over the past decade, but remain out of reach for the typical car buyer, and recently added pricing barriers of entry for new EV buyers is even a greater market challenge for auto dealers. Pricing premiums of $10,000 or more over MSRP for sought-after electric vehicle models, e.g., Ford’s Mustang Mach-e and F150 Lighting all electric pick-up truck, and Nissan’s forthcoming Ariya crossover are increasingly standard practice.

F-150 Lightning customers have only recently been able to convert their reservations into firm orders, while Ford has been receiving buyer complaints that certain dealerships are raising prices well above MSRP on the vehicles they ordered. Overpricing will certainly dent the reputation of the truck, Ford and its new EV offerings.

Ford and GM’s warnings to their dealer networks not to overprice their new EV models expose a tense undercurrent developing between legacy carmakers and dealers.

It’s more than a threat to business-as-usual for dealerships. Newer and emerging electric vehicle manufacturers like Tesla, Rivian and Lucid are now sell directly to buyers, in effect, eliminating the middleman.

At the same time, legacy automakers are banking on consumers to migrate to electric vehicles even as dealers worry they may adopt a direct-sales formula for EVs, following the start-up success of Tesla, and in effect edging them out of a market that’s projected to balloon to nearly $1 trillion by 2030.

Brian Moody, executive editor at Autotrader sees things this way, “This is not because Rivian and Tesla are demanding this,” he said, “it’s because consumers are demanding choice. They’ve gotten used to buying online.” More than three-quarters of F-150 Lightning reservation holders are new to Ford, many coming from recent buying experiences with EV start-ups that have direct-to-consumer sales.

The challenge for manufacturers is to bring their dealer networks into the 21st century

Just because legacy manufacturers are pivoting to EVs, experts say, automakers cannot simply ditch their dealer partners.

Manufacturers mostly don’t want to handle the real estate obligations of sales and service or the logistics of moving finished products. Dealers also have deep expertise in direct sales and local marketing. They know how to get customers in the door and into new cars. Manufacturers in many cases don’t want to take on those specialties. The transformation of the century old industry remains a work in progress, and EV’s, like their zero-to-sixty performance, just sped up that process.

Republicans absent, President Biden’s Climate Plan languishes; held hostage by a one coal state democrat

February 17, 2022/0 Comments/in Climate /by Bill Bugbee, Executive Editor

Meanwhile, hundreds of billions in private investment in a clean energy economy are mostly on hold awaiting Federal action.

Hundreds of billions in private investment in a clean energy economy are mostly on hold awaiting Federal action and Democratic lawmakers to enact clean energy tax credits proposed as part of the President Biden’s Build Back Better bill. According some economists the bill’s tax credit provisions pushes the economics of many projects over the hump.

The proposed bill, backed by President Biden, would pump about $550 billion into the clean energy and climate business, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, about $311 billion of it in the form of tax credits and incentives.

“Investors are waiting in the wings to deploy capital for clean energy, with this industry poised to be the major engine of 21st-century prosperity,” said Leah Stokes, an associate professor of political science at the University of California at Santa Barbara. “Without these government incentives, that capital won’t get deployed. With them, we are poised to have a prosperous clean energy economy.”

Industry groups, as well as climate activists, have been frustrated by the delays. More than 260 clean energy companies wrote to congressional leaders in January saying that each month of delay to the Build Back Better (BBB) tax incentives costs the U.S. economy as much as $2 billion in economic activity.

The letter cited an analysis by the American Clean Power Association that found the legislation would more than double clean energy investment to $750 billion over the next 10 years creating hundreds of thousands of new and good paying American jobs, while advancing America’s transition to a clean energy economy.

The same analysis projected that the credits would cut carbon emissions from the U.S. power sector by roughly 70 percent below 2005 levels — the equivalent of powering 175 million American homes with reliable and climate resilient clean energy.

Are EV’s in Trouble if BBB fails?

On average, the cost of a new electric vehicle, whether all-electric (BEV), and even plug-in hybrids (PHEV) are higher than that of a conventional gas powered car. In the case of 100% battery-electric vehicles (BEV’s) beyond drive off costs, when combined with lifetime owner maintenance costs altogether is cheaper than owing a gas or diesel powered car or truck. There are a number of federal & state electric car tax credits, many with complicated formulas to determine a BEV’s price tag, alos with hidden benefits of fuel savings that lower the upfront cost to potential BEV buyers, but often are apparent without first doing ones’ true cost ownership homework and looking beyond the vehicle’s price tag.

The President Biden’s BBB bill calls for expanding tax credits for Electric Vehicle purchases to as much as $12,500 (legacy Federal and state EV tax credits, some still in effect, offer significantly less financially benefits to BEV buyers on select qualifying models). In the meantime, Detroit and other automakers are (or preparing to) invest billions into new plants to produce EVs. Without Federal EV purchase credits, middle and lower income buyers will have difficult with current electric vehicle price tags, slowing the transition to zero emissions, this is especially true for many of Hawaii’s residents.

This tax credit has a “phase out” built into the program that is dependent on the manufacturer of the car. The phase out will kick in at the beginning of the second calendar quarter after a manufacturer has sold 200,000 eligible BEVs and/or PHEVs. Today, most electric cars brands remain eligible for this EV tax credit, excluding Tesla and GM. The phase out of the current EV purchase tax credit will not be occurring anytime soon, as a whole, the auto industry (other than Tesla) remains in the nascent stages of producing and selling BEV’s at scale.

BBB Passage, Democrats’ remain hopeful…

Democrats, in fact, remain optimistic that the EV and clean energy tax credits will be approved in one form or another.

Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin III (W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.) — whose opposition has stymied the bill — have expressed support for some of its key climate provisions, including most of the clean energy tax incentives. But Manchin has flipped flopped before on his stated bill commitments, and has also made clear this month that he does not want to approve an economic package right away and is focused on other legislative priorities.

For a large sector of American’s emerging clean energy economy, time is the enemy, both in terms of global competitiveness and global heating.

Without any Republican support in the Senate for meaningful climate solutions, Democrats’ will be forced to go it alone in what is presently an evenly politically divided Senate. If the worse case scenario plays in the 2022 election cycle, and Republicans re-take control of the Senate, and-or possible the House, time-essential climate legislation will be once again off the table.

Climate Change Brings Record Ocean Warmth 2

Great Barrier Reef on verge of another mass bleaching, is Hawaii next?

February 5, 2022/0 Comments/in Climate /by BeyondKona

Temperatures over the Great Barrier Reef in December (summer for Australia) were the highest on record with “alarming” levels of heat that have put this one-of kind ocean jewel on the verge of another mass bleaching of corals. Recent global climate changes represent a new normal of extremes in global air and water temperatures and weather.

According to Kyle Van Houtan, with the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s oceanography research team… “Extreme climate change is here, it’s in the ocean, and the ocean underpins all life on Earth.” More than 90% of the heat trapped by greenhouse gases is absorbed by the ocean, which plays a critical role in maintaining a stable climate.

Record breaking high ocean temperatures hit the Great Barrier Reef marine system in what has been considered an unprecedented reef bleaching event of 2015-16. And as these southern hemisphere high ocean temperatures migrated north with seasonal changes, the summer of 2015 was offer no relief for the northern latitudes and the Hawaiian island chain, which experienced a summer of massive coral die-off with devastating and last results to the state’s marine coral reef systems.

Scientists analyzed sea surface temperatures over the last 150 years, which have risen because of global heating linked to rising levels of carbon emissions, primarily associated with fossil fuels. The Monterey Bay research findings determined that extreme temperatures were occurring just 2% of the time a century ago and recently have risen to more than 50% of the time across global oceans since 2014.

What does this mean for Hawaii this coming summer and the state’s marine coral reef systems?

If the global marine heating patterns of 2015-16 repeat, Hawaii can likely expect this summer’s warming to produce further coral die-off, possibly repeating the severe temperature impacts to the corals which survived the 2015 bleaching event. The surviving coral species in Hawaii’s waters represented so-called temperature-tolerant marine corals, which also have their own limits and tolerance to high ocean temperatures.

Recent science and history have taught us that temperature extremes have an outsized impact on ecosystems, including documented changes to near shore marine environments in both latitudes, and from the deep ocean environments to coral reefs, kelp, most fish species, and most other marine life.

The scientists have also examined ocean temperature records from 1920 through 2019, the most recent year available. They found that by 2014, more than 50% of the monthly records across the entire ocean had surpassed the once-in-50–years extreme heat benchmark. The researchers called the year when the percentage passed 50%, and did not fall back below it in subsequent years, the “point of no return”.

By 2019, the proportion of the global ocean suffering extreme heat was 57%. “We expect this to keep on going up,” said Van Houtan. But the extreme heat was particularly severe in some parts of the ocean, with the South Atlantic having passed the point of no return in 1998. “That was 24 years ago – that is astounding,” he said.

“You should care about turtles, seabirds and whales, but even if you don’t, the two most lucrative fisheries in the US, lobster and scallops, are in those exact spots,” said Van Houtan, while 14 fisheries in Alaska have recently been declared federal disasters.

The Climate Connection

The heat content of the top 2,000 meters of the ocean set a new record in 2021, the sixth in a row. Prof John Abraham at the University of St Thomas in Minnesota, one of the team behind the assessment, said ocean heat content was the most relevant to global climate, while surface temperatures were most relevant to weather patterns, as well as many ecosystems.

“Oceans are critical to understanding climate change. They cover about 70% of the planet’s surface and absorb more than 90% of global warming heat,” Abraham said. “The new study is helpful because the researchers look at the surface temperatures. It finds there has been a big increase in extreme heat at the ocean’s surface and that the extremes are increasing over time.”

All coral will suffer severe bleaching when global heating hits 1.5C, study finds. Almost no corals on the planet will escape severe bleaching once global heating reaches 1.5C.

Adding to this correlational data, researchers have examined exactly how much more likely the warm conditions on the Great Barrier Reef were as a result of carbon emissions.

Imagine a world without human-induced global heating – a world without humans and their carbon emissions, the conditions on the Great Barrier Reef that caused the recent past and current bleaching events would have been virtually impossible,” said Dr. Andrew King, University of Melbourne.

Ocean warmth sets record high in 2021; Hawaii in the crosshairs

January 11, 2022/0 Comments/in Climate /by BeyondKona

The warmth of the world’s oceans hit a new record high.

A new analysis, published Tuesday in the journal Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, showed that oceans contained the most heat energy in 2021 since measurements began six decades ago — accelerating at a rate only possible because of human-emitted greenhouse gases.

“When you have this long-term upward trend, you’re getting records broken almost every year, and it’s this monotonous increase,” said John Abraham, a co-author of the study and a professor at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota.

Data was gathered from a worldwide network of buoys in seven ocean basins.

the team found that ocean waters have been steadily warming since 1958, with each decade warmer than the last. Warming has significantly increased since the 1980s. Over recent decades, portions of the Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean have warmed the most.

The longer-term trends brought on by human activity are also overpowering short-term climate fluctuations, such as La Niña and El Niño, which can have regional effects.

“Ocean stores more than 90 percent of the Earth’s net heat gain due to greenhouse gases. Thus, ocean warming is a fundamental indicator of the climate change,” Lijing Cheng, lead author and associate professor at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, wrote in an email. “The record ocean warming in 2021 is strong evidence that global warming continues.”

Global ocean warming is taking its toll

The 2021 record isn’t surprising, said ocean researcher Linda Rasmussen, who was not involved in the study. Mainly, Rasmussen said, that is because the major driver of ocean warming has not changed. “Because the ocean still absorbs the vast majority of the excess heat, it would be surprising if the trend didn’t continue.”

Last year, the record warmth manifested in several extreme weather events. Warmer water provides more energy, or fuel, for tropical storms, increasing their intensity and longevity. Following a record-breaking 2020 Atlantic hurricane season, 2021 brought another intense stretch of storms.

Hurricane Ida caused intense flooding and thunderstorms, ranking as the fifth-most expensive hurricane on record, with damage estimated at $75 billion. Hurricane Nicholas and Tropical Storms Elsa and Fred also inflicted billions of dollars’ worth of damage.

The increase in ocean heat also raises air temperatures, allowing more moisture to enter the warmer atmosphere. For every 1.8 degrees of warming, heavy rain events will intensify by about 7 percent. 2021 marked one of the wettest years on record for the East Coast, thanks to a slew of tropical storms and summer thunderstorms.

The unusual December tornadoes that struck several states can also be traced to the warm waters. In December, record warm temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico created an atmosphere more reminiscent of spring than winter. As such, two tornado outbreaks occurred in the southern and central United States in the same week.

Marine Heat Waves

“The coastal ocean temperatures that have broken records repeatedly in recent years would not have broken records without the underlying warming trend that has been in place for many decades,” wrote Rasmussen, a retired researcher at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. “Marine heat waves are one of the phenomena that are expected to increase as the ocean as a whole warms.”

“Ocean warming is destabilizing Antarctic ice shelves from underneath, which could lead to the collapse of large pieces of the ice sheet such as the Thwaites glacier, threatening massive . . . sea level rise,” Michael Mann, a co-author of the study and a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University, wrote in an email. “This finding really underscores the urgency of acting on climate now.”

Also see: https://www.beyondkona.com/hawaii-based-climate-solutions-needed-now/

Surface air temperatures for the past seven years were the hottest on record, with 2020 and 2016 tied for the warmest. Water, however, is much denser than air and holds heat much better than the atmosphere. It takes a much longer time for the oceans to either cool down or heat up, especially given that they cover more than 70 percent of Earth’s surface.

“If you want to know how fast the Earth is warming, you have to measure the oceans,” Rasmussen said. “Since most of the global warming heat ends up in the oceans, we like to say that ‘global warming is ocean warming.’

New oil and gas projects would produce 646 GtCO2 emissions, swallowing up the world’s entire carbon budget