The state blasted Hawaiian Electric Industries’ new energy transition plan for being stuck in the past and doing more to benefit the utility than the public.

"Hawaii cannot be a trailblazer in energy innovation by solving tomorrow’s problems with yesterday’s solutions," said the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism in an 86-page filing with the state Public Utilities Commission.

DBEDT registered its frustration with the utility, saying HEI is clinging to an old business model that is incapable of meeting the goal of moving Hawaii off fossil fuels and onto renewable energy.

The electric company’s plan proposes "what is best for the utilities, not what is best for the public," DBEDT said.

In August, Hawaiian Electric Co., a subsidiary of HEI, filed its plan with the PUC that included a goal of generating 65 percent of the utility’s power from renewable resources by 2030, tripling the amount of solar power and cutting the average bill for most customers by 20 percent.

DBEDT said it supports those targets but "is not entirely convinced that these goals go far enough."

The PUC has received hundreds of written comments on HECO’s plan and will consider them as it decides whether to approve or reject all or part of the plan. A date for the PUC’s decision hasn’t been set.

HECO said Thursday it would not comment on the DBEDT response or any individual submission at this time.

"We welcome all kinds of comments and look forward to the discussion process that will follow," said Peter Rosegg, spokesman for HECO.

DBEDT’s comments are surprising because the state usually takes a much more neutral tone, said Robert Harris, director of public policy at San Francisco-based Sunrun Inc., a solar company.

"I think it is surprising, the unanimity of those criticisms by so many of the major players," Harris said. "You essentially have every regulatory lobby in the state of Hawaii signaling deep frustration."

DBEDT criticized the HECO companies — Hawaiian Electric on Oahu, Maui Electric, and Hawaii Electric Light on the Big Island — for "maintaining the traditional vertically integrated model while not making significant progress on renewable penetration in the near term."

The state agency said it prefers rapid movement away from the old business model to one where HECO would get its profits from transmission and distribution of electricity but not generating power. That would allow many small players, such as rooftop solar systems or wind farms, to connect to the grid operated by HECO.

HECO’s plan is not progressive enough for Hawaii’s position in the renewable-energy market, DBEDT said.

HECO’s proposals relating to rooftop solar focus more on how the utility makes money and not enough on how the public can benefit from these programs, DBEDT said.

HECO proposed increasing the minimum monthly payment from customers with solar systems to $71 a month, up from $17 now, and reducing the amount HECO pays for solar power sent into the grid.

"The ‘problems’ these revisions are intended to address relate to ensuring a certain level of revenue or profitability for the HEI companies," DBEDT said. "These revisions are asymmetrical in that they appear focused on benefiting the HEI companies without any commensurate benefit to the public."

HECO has said it must slow down the addition of more rooftop solar systems because they might cause instability in the grid.

The state questioned that argument.

"The reference to the need to maintain ‘reliability’ may be overused and unjustified in order to support unit commitment and dispatch processes that favor the HEI companies," DBEDT said.

DBEDT also criticized HECO’s plan to convert its oil-burning power-generating plants to liquefied natural gas, or LNG, at a cost of about $200 million.

"Rather than using LNG as a bridge to a cleaner future, the HEI companies seem intent on using LNG as a bridge to more LNG," DBEDT said.

DBEDTsaid it was disappointed that HECOdidn’t support the Abercrombie administration’s plan to connect the Oahu and Maui power grids.

HECOsaid in its plan that the Oahu-Maui cable was not cost-effective.

That conclusion was not supported by detailed analysis, DBEDT said.

DBEDT comments on HECO plans