Click on email testimony
Type in SB367
Type in comments, and click the send button !!!
SB 367 SD3 HD1would create a PUC regulatory structure for undersea cables whereby ratepayers would carry all of the risk and the utility would make all of the profit.
* The utility argument was that it had to happen this year so that a cable company could be chosen this fall.
However, which islands will get proposed windfarms and which size the undersea cables need to be has hit a snag.
Last year the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) ruled that both FirstWind (Moloka`i) and Castle & Cooke (Lana`i) had to file with the PUC by March 18, 2011 term sheets laying out the cost of wind energy.
FirstWind defaulted and did not file a timely excuse. Almost 2 weeks late, FirstWind asked for an 8 month extension.
* The argument that Big Wind is the only answer is also in dispute. The Big Wind EIS Preparation Notice said that there are two alternatives, Big Wind with planning and Big Wind without planning.
Numerous comments to the EISPN challenged this.
DBEDT Office of Planning (March 1, 2011): “it is necessary for the draft EIS to explore alternatives”
US Environmental Protection Agency (Feb 28, 2011): “We recommend analysis of additional alternatives as early as possible”
Rather than rush thru a bad piece of legislation, we should wait until it has been determined whether Big Wind makes sense, and if so, under what conditions.
Please hold SB 367
Mahalo
Comments