HILO — A judge granted Hu Honua Bioenergy’s request for a summary judgment in a civil suit that sought to halt construction of the 30-megawatt biomass power plant in Pepeekeo until an environmental review is completed.
HILO — A judge granted Hu Honua Bioenergy’s request for a summary judgment in a civil suit that sought to halt construction of the 30-megawatt biomass power plant in Pepeekeo until an environmental review is completed.
The ruling Thursday by Hilo Circuit Judge Greg Nakamura, in effect, dismisses a lawsuit brought in Nov. 27 by Hilo bed-and-breakfast owner Claudia Rohr against the Hawaii County Planning Department and Windward Planning Commission. Hu Honua was brought into the litigation as a defendant in April.
Nakamura said that, under law, “a judicial proceeding, the subject of which is the lack of an environmental assessment, must be brought within 120 days of an agency’s decision to carry out or approve the action.”
The judge agreed with Hu Honua’s argument that since amendment of the Special Management Area use permit Hu Honua is operating under occurred on June 7, 2011, Rohr’s legal challenge wasn’t made in a timely manner.
The judge also rejected Rohr’s argument that Hu Honua’s request last year to the state Public Utilities Commission seeking preferential rates for the purchase of renewable energy produced by agricultural activities triggered the necessity for environmental review.
“The court’s view is that Hu Honua’s request to the PUC does not … for example, request approval of any use of land. … As such, the request does not trigger the requirement of an environmental assessment …,” Nakamura said.
“Wow, unbelievable,” Rohr said after the judge announced his ruling.
After the hearing, Rohr said she would appeal the decision.
Email John Burnett at jburnett@hawaiitribune-herald.com.
Subscribe today for unlimited access.
Already a subscriber?
Login
Not ready to subscribe?
Register for limited access.
If you have a print subscription but require digital access,
activate your account.
What’s wrong with this legal decision – just about everything that’s wrong with Hawaii’s power plans for a transition to a clean energy economy by 2045.
On one hand, the state is working to free Hawai’i of its fossil fuel dependency and the pollution impacts associated with that dependency. On the other hand, Hu Honua is example of replacing one bad polluting energy dependency for another.
The Hu Honua biomass power plant is the perfect example of the current legislative disconnect within the state’s current renewable energy policy allowing for both clean and dirty (emissions-emitting) power replacements of current fossil-fueled power plants.
Burning trash (so-called waste-to-energy) or cutting down and burning trees, and for that matter anything else that burns with a smokestack, may produce power, but the results are GHG and other airborne pollutant emissions, along with toxic ground-based waste by-products.
Solar, wind, pump storage, batteries, microgrids, other clean energy production and grid management options totally eliminate the need for electricity production that relies on dirty energy.
Just because it (Hu Honua) replaces the need for burning oil, coal, or gas to produce electricity does not make it better or right for Hawai’i Island, or the state.
HELCO, are you listening?
I’ve smelled the old coal burning powerplant at Pepe‘ekeo. I’d much rather smell woodsmoke (from a very fast re-growing tree) than coal fumes.
And are you going to help deal with the folks that don’t want to see the PGV reopen? Now THAT was a truly emissions free powerplant.
if you can smell and see your local powerplant smokestack emissions then you know that can’t be good for your health, our island environment, and climate change mitigation. Hu Honua’s tree-burning power plant, and a 24×7 supply-chain of trucks that will no doubt prove to be very costly to taxpayers, and also to the local environment. A supply chain liability totally unnecessary with alternative solar and wind power plant options for HELCO.
PGV was anything but an emissions-free and community friendly power plant. Geothermal sounds right for an active volcanic island, until the operation realities are examined. Drilling and operating on an active volcano has its risks, as recent history as shown with PGV emergency shut down and transfer of highly toxic chemicals used to produce power.
There was also HELCO’s scheduled supply power requirements that forced PGV to throttle up and down their wells, dramatically shortening the operating life of individual well sites and adding to an already the air pollution problem of sulfur dioxide emissions from the well sites. The shorter well operating life further met PGV needed to constantly drill for new well sites, with the added problem of local noise and vibration effects impacting the sleep of local residents.
OK, first off, it wasn’t any “highly toxic chemicals” that were moved out of the PGV, but pentane, which was used as transport medium for the geothermal heat to the turbines. It’s similar to propane, and was a fire hazard. I would be more afraid of the lithium batteries in a Prius or Tesla. There’s a reason hazmat crews have to come to accidents involving those cars. It’s also speculated that it might have downed MH370, as it was carrying a couple hundred pounds of them in the hold. And sulfur dioxide comes out of volcanoes in massive amounts, so the PGV SO2 emissions were a drop in the ocean compared to the amount Kilauea has put out over the last few decades.,
As to the 24×7 line of trucks? Well, I’ll bet that it won’t be anything that bad. Sounds like someone with another agenda, perhaps a competitor, is throwing out every kind of scare story to stop this project.
There are no competing polluting power plant options to Hu Honua, just better non-polluting clean energy options, that do not harm our island environment or require cutting down and burning local trees with a dirty energy supply chain required to produce electricity. Then there is the Hu Honua waste water and ash by-products, and a need to compete with taxpayer and utility subsidies for HELCO’s business.
As for the role of batteries combined with solar and wind, nothing could more safe and environmentally beneficial than Tesla Energy examples of doing it right with utility scale installation examples in Kauai and south Australia.