Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0679.007 2010-2012 Puna Geothermal Community Meeting March 31, 2012 Summary Ninety seven people signed in for the Geothermal Fact Finding Community Meeting on the evening of March 31, 2012.Since probably not everyone signed in,there seemed to be well over a hundred people in attendance.The meeting was called by Robert Petricci who is actively engaged in the organization of community members who live in close proximity to the Geothermal plant.This meeting was opened up to the greater Puna community and both sides were represented. Barbara Lively bravely volunteered to be the facilitator of the meeting.The format was devised by Steve Hirakami who has used Total Quality Management techniques at the Hawaii Academy of Arts&Science Public Charter School in Pahoa. The format was used to honor everyone's attendance and to give them a "voice"in a non-verbal way. If all of the attendees were to only speak for 3 minutes(which is rare in Puna)the event would have taken six hours to complete with no collective thought or result.The idea was for each person to express his or her idea via Post-its.The Post-its(which numbered in the hundreds)were pasted onto three 4x8 white boards with only category titles of Benefits, Hawaiian Cultural and Religious Beliefs, Concerns,Alternatives,and Others. Volunteers,which included Zendo Kern,James Weatherford,Gregor Ilacan, Diane Thomas, and Steve Hirakami sorted the Post-its into bullet points under the respective categories. While the boards were being organized,the audience broke into a lively dialogue and sharing.The audience was then directed to take three colored dots with different weights: blue=5 points; red=3 points, and yellow=1 point and place them into their personal weighted priorities.This was another lively exercise where people got to dialogue and strategize.The results of the voting are illustrated in the attached document: "Results of Multi-voting on Key areas". Based on the colorful representation of priority areas,the audience broke out into five group categories and were asked to meet,discuss, record,and report back to the group.The reports that were reported back to the audience are also attached.Of course,the benefits of geothermal were enumerated, but overall,the concerns were numerous and valid.A standout concern was about the protection by the US and State Constitution of Hawaiian spiritual and religious beliefs.Another valid concern was Health and Safety, learning from the past and looking to the future (if geothermal exploitation is increased).Geographical location was an immediate concern stating that extensive buffer and safety zones need to be in place with careful,comprehensive, and continuous monitoring of all environmental aspects.Alternatives were listed and the general message was not to put all our"eggs in one basket" but to use all the available sources of energy and distribute them in areas with the most demand.And the final topic was the secrecy behind the project and why community input isn't being acknowledged or even requested. Comm. No.i. 6?9• Ref. To: r/cow,Lc; Ref. Date APR 2 4 2012 The next meeting will determine action committees based on last Saturday night's findings.The question will ultimately be: Is this a Pono development for the community?See you there. a Puna Geothermal Community Meeting March 31, 2012 Results of Multi Voting on Key Areas(points) Benefits • Community building to create viable alternatives(5) • Independent from imported oil (9) • Renewable power • Lower HELCO rates(3) • Need for Alternative energy • IDG Local Development(20) • Clean energy(9) • Economic Gain(jobs) • Free Electric for Puna (12) • Power for Oahu • Use of relocation fund • Use of compensation fund • Locals buy direct from GEO at reduced rates • Subsidize fire insurance for residents in Lava Zone 1&2 (1) Hawaiian Rights; First Amendment Rights • Culture(20) • Pele:What would/will she do? (6) • Spiritual/Religious Practice/Rights(142) • Hawaiian People: Benefits?Respect?(10) • Hawaiian beliefs on wind,wave energy(3) Concerns • Health (86) • Safety(65) • Air pollution((8) • Noise(7) • Lights-astronomy-Seabirds(8) • Cost • Disclosure/Truth (25) • Evacuation(16) • Angering Pele(2) • Property Values(6) • Location in Residential(71) • Outdated Technology • Monitoring(30) • Other world's plants Success/Failure? • Future Generations(5) • Lava Zone • Mitigation (3) • Water Table Aquifer(22) • Flawed process(5) • Corporate Greed (4) • Serving other islands(3) • Underwater cables(13) • Endangered species • Over-riding EPA • Traffic • Fracking effects • Earthquakes • Blowouts(4) • Lose Hot pond (8) Alternatives • Solar(12) • Wind (8) • Biofuel (1) • Hemp(1) • Hydro (5) • Tesla (9) • Conserve(2) Other • Political corruption(21) • No Trust/Secretive (25) , Puna Geothermal Community Meeting March 31, 2012 Working Group Feedback Benefits • IDG: 2%gross$$ into community trust to go towards job training/employment for community • Energy provided for industrial park and agriculture • Fair rates without avoided cost, ie:fixed rates(no oil adjustment) • Transfer plant/project to public ownership • Energy independence with firm power • Local community employment • Direct use:Ag related: hot-house,food drying,timber/bamboo drying,aquaponics • Power for Technology Park • Alternative fuel production, ie: hydrogen fuel cells, palm oil • Location away from population • Lower property taxes for nearby parcels • Royalty income to OHA, State,County Hawaiian Rights; First Amendment Rights • Respect for Spiritual and Religious beliefs • Explore Theology beliefs BEFORE imposing anything that is not of the Hawaiian culture onto the People of Hawaii • State Constitution Article 12,Section 7 Religious Freedom Act(Hawaiian religion). Uphold customary,traditional, and spiritual beliefs • Government is obligated to do a study on the impact of projects on religious beliefs • Pele has been sending a continuous message about the desecration of sacred ground ever since January 1983. First started at the first Geo site at Kahaulea now known as Pu'u O'o • Uphold the religion of the Hawaiian People and the Spirit of Aloha • Lies by the government and corporations • Expose the CLOSED DOOR DEALS and/or the Judicial corruption • Stop imposing sacrilegious acts on Hawaiian people Health and Safety • Medical Survey: Study past health effects. Illnesses spiked during the 1993 blowout: asthma attacks,miscarriages, seizures,and other health deficiencies • Need for baseline studies on Lead, arsenic, asbestos in our aquifer and offshore waters • Once a year monitoring is not sufficient. No underground monitoring. No data/monitor verified • Purchase monitors($25K each)from Geo Asset Fund • February 2, 2012 Huge explosion at plant. Skyquake? Police and firefighters respond. Public had no access to plant • 2000 Hazard and Chemical report. 11 years without another report. Nothing implemented from the report. • The State has no authority to implement actions to mitigate hazards • Environmental Justice: The State needs attention to activate E.J.when they receive complaints. • After blowout in 1991 State hired investigative team to see what went wrong. Need for Status Updates on regular basis. • Educate public what an environmental complaint issue is • Well on top of Ainaloa:Are the taxpayers paying for this research? • Stop growing this industry(geothermal)and create new and smaller generation in appropriate locations(distributed generation) • Hydrogen Sulfide is heavier than air,does not rise quickly in atmosphere. Lingers and makes people sick Geographic Location • Location, location, location • Need for buffer zones/setbacks. 10 miles away from residential area.Safety Zone • Monitoring—Ground. • Notification like Robo-call (auto dialer to area residents). Immediate online notification • Create new locations that meet requirements in areas where power is most needed • Water Table Quality. No chemicals should re-injected into aquifer. Constant testing of water quality after baseline study. • Loss of Hot Pond possibility • Need for studies on costs,dependability,and maintenance for underwater cable,transmission lines to Kona/Kohala Alternatives • More Solar and wind generation • Cost of undersea cable could put solar on every house • Utilize multiple sources,decentralize. Biomass, OTEC,wave, night energy collection panels, methane gas extraction from landfills and sewers, macnuts, bamboo,etc. as fuel, micro wind and hydro turbines • Bank excess energy • Conservation:Change wasteful behavior, use energy efficient bulbs and appliances • Increase use of Solar Hot Water(only 30%now) • Create Solar"Credit Unions" (Banks) • Legislative changes needed: Building code changes. HELCO limiting solar photovoltaic use. Political corruption/Secrecy • Lack of transparency • What are community rights? • Secrecy—By whom? For whom? • Why are true costs externalized? (internalized?) • Community is not being involved in decision making. Process leaves community out. • The"Forces"outside our community give us no input • Statewide planning needed with everyone concerned • Decentralized energy(distributed generation) • Money,control,and power versus Environmental justice • Ask the State to enforce sunshine laws • Energy projects being exempted from EIS requirements in legislature • Support publically funded elections • Residents will suffer the consequences without input • Government is failing to serve us • Need Mock Emergency Drill (enough gas masks,emergency responders?) Hawaiian Culture and Spiritual Rights 1. Does the council see standing in the claim by Hawaiians that their religious rights, as guaranteed by the State of Hawaii Constitution, are being violated? 2. Why is the State Constitution Article 12, Section 7 The Religious Freedom Act being ignored when considering drilling into aina that is the land of Pele? 3. Is there any area where it is too sacred to drill (like near a heiau or volcano)? Health and Safety 1. What is the evacuation plan at present?What is the maximum amount of people that can be evacuated? What is the amount of safety equipment(gas masks)that are available at present for evacuees? 2. Why isn't PGV paying for more monitoring? 3. Could water quality reports of surface, underground aquifers, and offshore waters be made available from 1989 to present? What baseline water studies were done? If none, why? 4. Does the State Health Department and/or the County have the capacity to handle large scale evacuations and emergency health care? 5. Does the County or State have the health care facilities available for pet emergencies due to geothermal blowouts? 6. How can the mitigation funds be allocated towards real safety mitigation efforts instead of other projects? 7. Due to the health concerns of the people in Puna regarding geothermal emission issues, why is there no 24 hour emergency care in all of Puna? 8. Why can't government change the community asset fund into community mitigation funds? 9. Why isn't the information from monitors in real time and publicly accessible on- line? 10. When does PGV plan to fix the current problem with geothermal before moving on to any more development of increased output at PGV? 11. What is the correlation between the PGV elevated emissions and blowouts ('91 and '93 but not exclusively) and morbidity and mortality rates for women and children, including birth abnormalities? 12. Why are the citizens in the immediate danger zone not equipped as well as the facility employees, specifically with electronic canaries and oxygen masks? 13. Is government going to provide a timeline on implementing an early warning system and the emergency response drill and response? 14. Why has PGV been allowed to remain in violation of no emergency evacuation plans? 15. Can the County Council look into all the health and safety violation requirements? 16. When will there be a stop to the catalyzed sulfite from polluting the area? 17. What is the abatement system for caustic and emergency emissions run on? 18. Is the back-up 1.5 and 2.0 HP engine adequate to protect the health and safety of the people in case of an emergency? 19. Has the government considered the possibility of violations of the Clean Water Act with the present reinjection of toxic wastes into our aquifer? 20. When a well is capped, what monitoring is done to insure that the casing is not damaged or leaking? 21. Why are there an insufficient number of monitors? 22. Is there a designated evacuation zone? 23. What monitoring is being done for the full range of toxic gases and metals? 24. Why is the County and State NOT concerned about the pollution of the water table? 25. Who is responsible in case of an emergency? What is the emergency response plan and how are we going to evacuate and where are we going to go? Who pays for the evacuation and the shelters (long term may be needed)? 26. Who sets the standards for air quality? Will we have the most recent and best methods of monitoring gases emitted from the facility? Who pays for it? 27. Concerning re-injecting of fluids on a large scale, what about fracking? Pollution of our pristine ocean? Poisoning our ground water? 28. What is the dissipation rate of Hydrogen Sulfide and Sulfur Dioxide in our atmosphere? 29. Have auto dialers or on-line websites been designed for immediate warning in case of an emergency? Geographic Location 1. According to some scientific research, as noted by Harry Kim,the safe zone for geothermal is clearly defined as 10 miles. Will the county insist that the 10 mile safe limit be adhered to, despite the fact that the current plan only requires 1 mile? 2. It has been brought to our attention that there is no early warning system. Several people have had access to "Dot Ring Maps" and seeing how extensive particulate matter falls during a blowout, in the range of 1300 ppm) are especially concerned to identify how many schools fall within this range which is considered highly dangerous? Will the county join with us to quickly establish clarity on this point? 3. Who decided that a one mile radius would be an adequate safe zone for geothermal? 4. Why is the 10 mile radius NOT being honored? 5. Why has PGV been allowed to remain in violation of light and sound mitigation requirements? 6. Considering the Clean Energy Act 2030 Initiative, why would you put a plant and invest millions of dollars in an area that is designated by volcanologists as the highest probability of a lava flow (Lava zone 1) when it has been documented in Iceland that drilling into an active lava resource caused an active eruption? 7. How far is the perimeter for monitoring air quality from each individual well and of the site in general? 8. Why did volcanic eruption start when the first well was drilled at Kahaualea, and has continued to flow with more geothermal exploration? 9. What monitoring is being done to see if the heat from the hot ponds are being affected by geothermal exploitation? 10. How will noise pollution be dealt within our quiet country area? Who do we bring our grievances to and how long will it take to get an answer to them? Do we have to get lawyers? 11. What about relocation for people most affected and who is going to pay and WHEN? 12. This location is on the most active volcano in the world. Are there not other geothermal locations more stable? Are there other locations further from rural subdivisions? What happens when the volcano says enough? What about all the money spent? 13. Why isn't any power distributed in Pahoa near the geothermal plant? Alternatives 1. What percentage of the State's energy consumption depends on the Puna geothermal expansion? 2. Has the County looked into smaller community owned grids to supply our County's needs when they are efficiently working in 3`d world countries? 3. Why has HELCO decided to limit the number of homeowners and businesses that want to use Photovoltaic systems? 4. Why does the State of Hawaii emphasize geothermal development over the development of other alternative sources such as wind, solar,wave,biofuel, etc? 5. Why has HELCO decided to limit the number of homeowners and businesses that want to use Photovoltaic systems? 6. Why does the State of Hawaii emphasize geothermal development over the development of other alternative sources such as wind, solar, wave,biofuel, etc? Transparency versus Secrecy 1. We understand that,in or around 2007,the state legislature, with promotion by Senator Russel Kokubon,brought monies to the state of Hawaii to study furthering geothermal development. An amount of money($10,000 or$100,000) was appropriated to the State Dept. of Energy and then was distributed to a working committee. Our group estimates that 3,900 people now live in areas that are proximate and will be affected by the proposed expansion, and we understand that many of these people have purchased land or obtained building permits after 2007. How many building permits have been issued since 2007 falling within a 10 mile radius of proposed sites? Will the county stand behind us in admonishing those who let people buy and build in zones destined to be neighbors to a geothermal plant? 2. When a building permit is applied for, does the county inform the applicant of the proximity to a geothermal site, or a proposed geothermal site? Will the county join us in creating notification to be given within a 10 mile radius if this is not already required? 3. Are realtors obligated to inform clients of their proximity to a geothermal site, or a proposed geothermal site? Will the county join us in creating notification to be given in a 10 mile radius if this is not already required? 4. Who are the title holders to the lands currently home to geothermal plants? Will the county join us in establishing clarity on this point if not already established? 5. Has it been identified which TMKs will be acquired for the new facility? Will the county join us in establishing clarity on this point if not already established? 6. In regards to lands being used to support geothermal plants, are any county, state or federal leases involved? In other words, is the government leasing out lands? Also, is the government paying for leases to support the activity? Will the county council join us calling for a moratorium on furthering land deals regarding geothermal, giving time for the current political process to resolve? 7. Who are the insurance companies willing to cover the Geothermal? How good is their backing? What governmental agency is responsible for making sure this piece of the puzzle is in place BEFORE a project is permitted? 8. There is a suspicion of a cover-up at the current facility. That after a lightning strike, there was a significant loss of power being produced. Was it an accident, or abnormality reported during the time of the lightning storm? The suspicion is that the operators have lost control of several vital functions of the facility and that as a result,poisons are being introduced into the water table, etc., and that this is all being covered up. How much is currently being produced, and what is your source of this information? Will the county council meet with citizens who are close to the plant, determine if the fears are founded, and if so, call for an investigation? 9. The energy study presented by Geothermal in the permitting process seems flawed in that it compares apples to oranges. Geothermal was compared to oil as the alternative source. Oil is used primarily on the island for trucks and cars. The largest consumers of electricity are 39.47% going to electric hot water and 25.44% going to refrigerators. Will the council support the creation of a citizens energy council to craft a package of alternatives for our passage through these very difficult and unique times? 10. It is our understanding that the current geothermal plant is in violation of the law as they were required, 7 years ago, to complete an emergency response plan. They have no plan. Also, we believe that in the original permit,the pages dealing with the"worse case"scenario are blank. Will the County Council join with us in demanding creation of the plan in a timely fashion? Does the county have within its power and authority to issue consequences for noncompliance and are they willing to do so? 11. It has been brought to our attention that there is something called a MSDS, short for Material Safety Data Sheets. In this area of focus,there is what is called a "Royal Purple List." At issue here is our understanding that,because of the highly corrosive nature of the business, lead and arsenic are used to keep metal from corroding. These substances are dumped in wells and are hence in our water table. If these materials are being used, will the county join us in placing a moratorium on their use? Will the county join us in demanding an in-depth analysis of the effects of geothermal on underground water, and insist on positive results before granting permission for any further geothermal development? And furthermore, will the county insist that the research includes input and guidance from people standing opposed to its development, as well as the proponents? 12. It is our understanding that the permit for the current geothermal was issued under special circumstances, that it was expedited, cleared and signed off on by Chancy lieu at the Department of Health. It is our understanding that he is a geologist and not a chemist. Will the council join with us in determining the factual story of the granting of the permit so that the ethics of the permit granting authority are not in question? If these facts are correct, we feel strongly that the permit was issued without just and proper consideration, and we would challenge the authenticity of the permit and petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 13. We understand that at least some employees of the Geothermal have stated publicly that they were required to sign a statement in order to acquire a job at Geothermal, and that the statement required a vow of secrecy in regards to what the employees see, experience, and learn of the Geothermal activities. Are these practices legal? Will the council join us in denouncing any such practices? If these practices are illegal, will the council meet with those who have information about the alleged activities, determine if the fears are founded and if so, call for an investigation? 14. Should there be a current EIS due to proposed and current growth? 15. How does an entity with known negative impact on human health,plants,water, and air get around doing a mandatory EIS? 16. Why is geothermal development not at the top of the list for an EIS? 17. Could government revoke the PGV permit until a current and complete EIS is undertaken? 18. What would it take to shut down PGV? 19. Who is responsible to hold the developers to acceptable monitoring, the State? The County? 20. What exactly caused the explosion on 2/22/2012? What were the effects? 21. How does reinjection of the spent steam and toxins affect the whole region that is close to the surface? 22. What are you doing to test for any underground leaks? 23. Why is geothermal being termed"clean" energy? 24. How much money is this proposed giant facility going to cost? Cable and transmission. Who is going to pay for it? 25. Who are the investors? Specific personal names, not corporate entities. People in our community have a right to know who their neighbors are going to be and where the money is going. 26. Why has the reporting of emergency declarations only publicized in records up till 1999? 27. Why have there been so many complaints and nothing done to question or revoke the permit geothermal has to operate on agriculturally zoned land? 28. Why was the study by Dr Marvin Legator of the University of Texas Medical Branch discounted by Bruce Anderson, State Health Director, without evidence to the contrary that Hydrogen Sulfide was responsible for increased ill health effects of the neighboring community? 29. Why did the County not respond to the March 22, 2012 request for comments to the BLNR on the 65 year extension of lease for PGV? Planning: No response. Police: No objections. Public Works: No response. Department of Water Supply: No objections to the statement: "the proposed use has continued since 1986. Such use has resulted in no known significant impacts,whether immediate or cumulative, to the natural, environmental and/or cultural resources in the area. As such, staff believes that the proposed use would involve negligible or no expansion or change in use of the subject area beyond that previously existing". Because of the last statement and no comments or objections, this project is being exempted from an EIS. Why? 30. Are consumers still paying for the transmission lines that cost millions of dollars from PGV to Hilo and on to Waikoloa and Kona? 31. How many people are employed by PGV, where are they from, and are there training programs so that more island residents can have jobs? 32. Have studies been done on the costs, dependability, and maintenance for the undersea cable and corresponding transmission lines? 33. Why is the community being left out of the decision making process?