Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0918.027 2012-2014 r- RESOLUTION NO. 45214 - PUBLIC HEARING FRIDAY - JULY 18, 2014 - COUNCIL TESTIMONY reel @iap.com <rce1 Giisp.com> Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 710 PM ALOHA COUNCIL MEMBERS, O � I ASK YOU TO VOTE FOR 452 14 AND STOP NE INCINERATOR NONSENSE NOW!! o ATTACHED IS A HUNTER BISHOP ARTICLE FROM BIG ISLAND NOW TITLED, — ' "ANALYSIS: SIX MYTHS ABOUT COUNTY'S WASTE INCINERATION PLAN". +r MYTH 1 HAS TO DO WITH BURNING RUBBISH TO PRODUCE ELECTRICITY. IF — PRODUCING ELECTRICITY IS NE GOAL WOULDNT THE FIRST STEP BE TO MAKE SURE YOU CAN SELL NE PRODUCED POWER. HAS NAT BEEN DONE? WE NOUGHT tit -" YOU WERE GOING TO ASK DIRECTOR LIGHT-HEAD-TODD NAT AT YOUR CONTINUED COMMITTEE HEARING BUT MAYOR HUFF AND PUFF INSTEAD WITH YOUR ACQUIESCENCE PUMMELED MARGARET. DID YOU GET ANY QUESTIONS ANSWERED? I WILL ANSWER FOR YOU! N-0 NO! MYTH 2 IS A BIGGIE. IT HAS TO DO WITH ADEQUATE WASTE TO BURN IN AN INCINERATOR. HOW MANY OF YOU GOT THIS ANSWERED BEFORE YOU VOTED FOR THE RFP? THE MAN IS SIMPLE. TOTAL WASTE STREAM MINUS 100% VERIFIABLE RECYCLABLE COMMODITIES MINUS 100% YARD WASTE MINUS 100% COMPOSTED FOOD WASTE MINUS THE HAWAII ISLAND LAND FILL AT PUUANAHULU MINIMUM CONTRACTUAL AMOUNT MINUS THAT PART OF THE WASTE STREAM NAT IS REMOVED BY PRIVATE ENTERPRISE SUCH AS A PROPOSED WASTE TO ENERGY PLANT IN WEST HAWAII ETC. EQUALS WHAT IS AVAILABLE FOR THE MAYORS RUSH UP AND DO NOT ASK QUESTIONS, UNWANTED INCINERATOR. DO YO KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT EQUATION. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY TONS REMAIN TO BE INCINERATED. COULD YOU SHARE NAT NUMBER WITH US? COULD YOU TELL US HOW MANY TONS PER DAY OF TO)aC ASH FROM THE PROPOSED INCINERATOR WILL BE TRUCKED TO THE HAWAII ISLAND PUUANAHULU LAND FILL? CAN YOU TELL US THE ROUTE THESE TRUCKS WILL TAKE FROM HILO TO THE LANDFILL AND HOW MANY TRIPS THERE WILL BE? MYTH 3 HAS TO DO WITH THE TIPPING FEE WE WILL PAY AT THE INCINERATOR. CAN YOU SHARE WITH NE TAXPAYERS WHAT THAT COST IS AND HOW DOES TT COMPARE WITH OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE TODAY? MYTH 4 GIVES YOU NE ANSWER HOW TO SOLVE THE WASTE HANDLING ON HAWAII ISLAND. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SPEND 1 CENT OF TAXPAYER MONEY TO DO iT. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SQUANDER TAXPAYER DOLLARS ON SOME OVERPRICED UNDER CAPABLE CONSULTANT FROM THE MAINLAND THAT DOES NOT HAVE A CLUE ABOUT HAWAII ISLAND. IT IS THE LEAST EXPENSIVE OPTION AVAILABLE. IT WILL LAST FOR 30 YEARS OR MORE. IT WILL ACCOMPLISH WHAT WE ARE ALL ASKING FOR, TOTAL- 100% VERIFIABLE RECYCLING. IT LIVES UP TO ZERO WASTE CURRENT POLICY. -/'I g', 2,7 Comm. o MYTH 5 REGARDING HAULING TO THE HAWAII ISLAND LANDFILL AT PUUANAHULU Ref. To: Ref. Date JUL 2014 SETS A TONE WE SHOULD ALL ADOPT FORTHWITH, INCLUDING EVERYQNE ON THE COUNSEL. CAUSING DIVISIVENESS BETWEEN EAST AND WEST MAY HAVE SHORT TERM POLITICAL BENEFITS. IT HAS GONE ON FOR TOO LONG. WE ARE ONE ISLAND, WE ARE ONE PEOPLE. WE ARE NOT SOUTH, NORTH, WEST, EAST, MAUKA, MAKAI OR AWAENA. WE ARE THE 1 L RESIDENTS/TAXPAYERS/INHABITANTS/VOTERS OF HAWAII ISLAND. WE HAVE ALL PAID TO BUILD AND OPERATE PUUANAHULU. IT IS A HAWAII ISLAND LANDFILL. WHY OPERATE 2 LANDFILLS WHEN ONE WILL DO? ESPECIALLY WHEN ONE HAS COMPLETED ITS OPERATIONAL CAPACITY AND THE OTHER HAS 30 OR MORE YEARS LEFT. AND AS STATED, THE ASH WOULD BE HAULED TO PUUANAHULU DAILY `-* ANYWAY. MYTH 6 ZERO WASTE DOES NOT INCLUDE AN INCINERATOR. ALL THE STUDIES CONCLUDE THAT HAULING THE RESIDUE WASTE STREAM IS THE MOST FEASIBLE AND COST EFFECTIVE. WHY ARE YOU PURSUING AN RFP THAT IS TOTALLY UNNEEDED? VOTE FOR 452 14. LETS STOP THE NONSENSE. MAHALO, BOB ERNST 718/2014 ANALYSIS:SixN4ths Abort Caurtis Waste kndneratian Ran I Ng island Nov - Big Wand Now - http://bigisiandnow.com- ANALYSIS: Six Myths About County's Waste Incineration Plan Posted By Hunter Bishop On July 9, 2014 @ 4:43 pm In Discussion.Featured Articles I MI Comments The battle is on over the future of solid waste on the Big Island. Mayor Billy Kenoi's ambitious plan to build a solid waste incinerator in fewer than 30 months is fresh on the table and at least one Hawaii County Council member, Margaret Wille, already wants to throw it out and start over. But Kenoi can't afford any delays if he's to meet his self-imposed end-of-term deadline, which leads to a rush-rush approval process with little time to mull over the product he's selling. So while the plan unfolds, here's a little guidance to some popular misconceptions. iMYTH: Getting energy from our rubbish is a great idea. REALITY: It might be if the utility would buy it. But Maui County couldn't strike a deal to sell any energy to Maui Electric Co. for the same reasons Hawaii County may have difficulties striking a deal with Hawaii Electric Light Co. — a glut of available energy sources and reluctance to take old oil-fired plants offline. So instead of electricity, Maui's proposed new incinerator will produce natural gas and refuse-derived fuel, pellets that can be burned to produce energy elsewhere, though markets for pellets are limited. 2 MYTH: There's plenty of rubbish to burn on the Big Island. REALITY: In order to get enough rubbish to burn efficiently in the Hilo incinerator, the county would take rubbish that's now going to Puuanahulu and haul it to Hilo. That would put a costly dent in the amount of rubbish going to Puuanahulu, where the county is contractually obligated to pay higher tipping fees as volume drops, raising the cost per ton at Puuanahulu by as much as 35%. The mayor's proposal also doesn't account for a private developer's plan to build a waste-to-enerav plant in West Hawaii,[1l that would burn rubbish collected from its existing residential and commercial clients. 3 MYTH: An incinerator won't cost taxpayers anything because a large company will pay for its �++ construction and operation. REALITY: The large company will charge a tipping fee for each ton the county delivers to the incinerator. That's where the company recoups its investment in the incinerator— plus profit — over the 20- to 30-year term of the contract. In 2008, the county would have been on the hook for$11.5 million dollars a year if the council had OK'd Mayor Harry Kim's plan for a $125.5 million incinerator, and that was only if the county sold $7 million worth of electricity it produced each year. Kenoi's proposed new incinerator is about 30% larger than the one Kim proposed. 1 MYTH: We will need an incinerator when the Hilo landfill finally gets full. REALITY: The county owns another landfill at Puuanahulu, a licensed facility that's good to accept rubbish at its current rate for 30 years, and hauling rubbish to Puuanahulu has been shown to be the most inexpensive of all the county's feasible alternatives by far. Cost savings could be used to promote aggressive waste reduction, reuse and recycling programs that could cut the amount of waste needed to be put in the landfill. gMYTH: The county can avoid hauling rubbish from East Hawaii to West Hawaii. REALITY: Some West Hawaii residents are so emotionally opposed to Hilo rubbish coming their way that former Councilman Pete Hoffmann famously vowed to lie down in front of the trucks. Councilwoman Brenda Ford simply said she didn't want Hilo's trash in West Hawaii. Mayor Kenoi just said it's "off the table."The local newspaper has reported "opposition," and has called hauling "controversial" and "politically unpalatable."Yet no one has articulated htIrddbig islan taw.c«rv2014ro7roe/anol sis-six-my hs-about cou itys-wssee-incinerador-gan/prin> rint 1/2 7/9/2014 ANALYSIS:Six MAs About Cou tIfs Waste Incineration Ran I Big Island Na w any reasons for their opposition. Hauling would utilize a county-owned landfill at Puuanahulu to save Big Island taxpayers many millions of dollars of unnecessary expense to build an incinerator. There needs to be a better explanation to justify the opposition to that. After all, even if the Council approves the mayor's proposed incinerator,trucks will be hauling the ash that's left in the incinerator from Hilo to West Hawaii on a daily basis anyway. 6 MYTH: Studies support building an incinerator. REALITY: This plan is Mayor Kenol's vision and represents a departure from the recommendations in county Department of Environment Management documents such as the Integrated Resources and Solid Waste Management Plan (2009), Hilo Landfill Feasibility Study (2012), and Hauling Pilot Study (2012), which identify hauling as the most feasible, cost-effective solution to the looming problem of where to put the county's rubbish when the Hilo landfill closes. Big Island Now staff writer Hunter Bishop is a former executive assistant to Mayor Billy Keno!and former deputy director of the Department of Environmental Management. Article printed from Big Island Now: http://bigislandnow.com URL to article: http://blgislandnow.com/2014/07/09/analysis-six-mytfis-about countys- waste-incineratlon-plan/ URLs in this post: [1] waste-to-energy plant in West Hawaii: http://blgislandnow.com/2014/04/22/big- island-rubbish-enough-to-go-around/ Copyright © 2012 Big Island Now. All rights reserved. F ://bigisiandnowcom2014 1071091analysis-six-rrps-about countwe indneralion-piedprindIPrint 2/2