Hawaii’s aggressive policy aimed at reducing the state’s overwhelming reliance on fossil fuels has made admirable progress on several fronts.

The penetration of solar energy in the residential market has advanced more quickly than anyone anticipated. Hawaii island seems to be on a pathway toward energy self-sufficiency, owing largely to its rich resources of geothermal power. Maui County is positioned well to make wind energy a significant part of its portfolio. Kauai has seized on various generation technologies, from hydroelectric to solar.

Of course, capitalizing on this natural wealth is anything but a straightforward proposition. This is an island state, and the same natural forces that produced geothermal energy, for example, also created an archipelago cut through with deep channels that would be challenging, and expensive, to bridge.

Building an interisland cable to link the energy production in one place with customers an ocean channel away remains the most logical proposition for Hawaii to achieve a much more resilient power grid. It would allow more of the state’s green energy to be used because, for example, the energy produced on Maui could be transmitted to Oahu where the demand is greatest.

However, there are also good reasons to revisit the idea and recheck the state’s assumptions. For instance, a recent document filed by Hawaiian Electric Co. before the Public Utilities Commission indicated that the power utility’s own green-energy commitments could be met without the cable being built.

Further, the sale of Lanai to billionaire Larry Ellison and changes ordered by the PUC in the bidding process for renewable energy projects may change the overall calculus for the interisland cable, and that prompted the commission to open a new investigation.

This is a healthy development. We’re talking about an enterprise with an estimated price tag of $1 billion. Even if the cable project were to start with a Maui-to-Oahu leg, as has been proposed, it makes abundantly good sense to take second and third looks at it.

That’s why what has emerged from the PUC is a smart decision: The commission is allowing seven community, environmental and industry groups to be "intervenors" in its investigation, giving them greater say in whether the cable gets built.

The entireties granted this status are: NextEra Energy Hawaii LLC, Life of the Land, the Renewable Energy Action Coalition of Hawaii, I Aloha Molokai, Maui County, Hawaii Interisland Cable LLC and First Wind Holdings LLC. They ought to be able to present wide-ranging perspectives on the project, informing the final decision.

Gov. Neil Abercrombie has clearly set out his own preference: Build the cable, he said, speaking at the Asia-Pacific Clean Energy Summit this week.

"We believe that connecting the islands through an integrated, modernized grid is the best way to utilize our islands’ best resources at a scale that will reduce cost," he said. "This means lower rates on the neighbor island as soon as they‘re connected."

The governor ultimately may prove right. The state does have a deep interest in achieving efficiencies of scale and robust options for the transmission of electricity. But the consumers also have interests in ensuring that they get the best bang for the buck.

Life of the Land’s Henry Curtis said the process will provide understanding of the cable project in all its aspects. We agree. Embarking on such a project without such a full inquiry might be done more quickly, but at risks of expensive missteps the state can scarcely afford.