A clear choice
Reader Marcel Turmelle says he does not understand the Hawaii Supreme Court’s unanimous 5-0 rejection of Honua Ola’s power purchase agreement with Hawaiian Electric (Your Views, March 26).
He argues that Honua Ola will have high-tech scrubbers in place to deal with pollution, that 250 people will now be deprived of a decent living, and that those darn trees Honua Ola would chop down are simply blocking the view of the ocean. Really?
Pollution is now an existential threat to our planet, and perhaps reader Turmelle needs to inform his opinion with some inconvenient facts. Foremost among them is the fact that 8 million metric tons of 30-year carbon emissions would come from the plant, scrubbers or not. These are numbers that Honua Ola acknowledges.
Second, the Public Utilities Commission found that approval of the Honua Ola proposal would increase the typical consumer bill by $10.97 a month throughout the full 30-year term, which grosses out to almost $4,000 per household over the 30-year period.
When weighed against this incremental consumer burden, 250 jobs do not feel very compelling.
Finally, Honua Ola’s electric power would displace other existing and more environmentally friendly renewable resources. These facilities have employees, too. And investors.
This is not rocket science. Our choice is between two alternatives. On one hand, we can follow reader Turmelle’s advice to approve Honua Ola and generate massive pollution and higher electricity costs. Alternatively, we can elect to close Honua Ola down and benefit from no pollution and cheaper electricity rates. More pollution and higher costs versus no pollution and lower costs.
It’s not rocket science.
Skip Sims
Ninole
University town?
The March 26 edition of the Tribune-Herald included a supplement titled, “University Town.”
Hilo, a university town? Really?
Last time I looked, the student body was lagging in the lower 3,000 area, while 10 to 15 years ago, the number hit 5,000 students.
Nobody in the University of Hawaii system seems to be talking about the reason why the enrollment numbers are low. Nobody has apparently considered that the community at large — the UH-Hilo management team, the Hawaii County team, and yes, the private sector team — has ever (at least in the past 25 years) done anything material to make our students welcomed and comfortable around Hilo.
Where, for example, can a student go to buy a cup of coffee and a sandwich, get a haircut, buy a scientific calculator, buy a T-shirt, buy a burger and a beer, buy a Big Mac and diet coke, etc? While there are such outlets available in Hilo, all are miles away from campus.
There is no place where students can go to at or near the campus for daily living activities, and there is no public transport system.
A university town, Hilo is not. A town with a university is more like it.
Chris Tamm
Pepeekeo
Shame on HTH
This one-sided report about military activity on Hawaii Island distorts the authentic context of the issues raised (“Army official addresses PTA, concerns about China in the Pacific,” Tribune-Herald, April 4).
As a participant in the peace movement here, I am ashamed that you would, on the anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., pen a report that ignored issues about the PTA that have serious implications for everyone regarding health, pollution, stewardship, transparency and responsibility.
In your fawning, uncritical advertisement of Maj. Gen. Joe Ryan’s remarks, you ignored the truth about the toxic waste catastrophe this military bomb site is on this island.
Shame on you for contributing to the endangerment of the keiki by encouraging the schools to bus them into harm’s way.
Any fair-minded report would have a least mentioned the efforts of the local peace group Malu ‘Aina that has held a continuous vigil for peace and to cancel the lease at PTA every Friday in Hilo since 2002!
Stephen Paulmier
Hilo
