Honua Ola Bioenergy suffered yet another setback Wednesday in its effort to launch a $350 million biomass plant that would burn trees to generate electricity on Hawaii island.

The Public Utilities Commission denied the company’s motion to reconsider the commission’s July 9 order denying Hawaii Electric Light Co.’s request for a waiver from a new competitive bidding process.

In its decision, the commission said the arguments by the company, previously known as Hu Honua, didn’t even meet the legal requirements for reconsideration.

In a summary of its order, the PUC stated it affirmed its belief the public interest would be best served by requiring the project to be evaluated alongside other renewable energy proposals.

“Based on the success of the first two rounds of HELCO’s ongoing competitive bidding process underway since 2017, the Commission will direct HELCO to open a third round of competitive bidding, which will provide another opportunity for Hu Honua to advance its project for consideration,” the PUC said.

In a statement, Honua Ola Bioenergy said it was disappointed in a decision it described as “killing a badly needed firm renewable energy project on Hawaii Island.”

“Today’s order from the PUC disregards due process, and disrespects the 64 workers whose jobs are threatened during this unprecedented economic crisis,” the company said.

Honua Ola said this “hasty ruling” comes after the PUC ordered it to complete the project in 2017 and is now ignoring the hundreds of millions of dollars spent since then bringing the project to 99% completion.

“The Commissioners have further shown a disregard for due process by failing to follow the Supreme Court directive to consider the evidence on greenhouse gas, which Honua Ola would reduce significantly, and the detrimental environmental impacts of continued fossil fuel use.”

The company has 30 days to appeal to the Hawaii Supreme Court.

Asked if it would would appeal, the company responded that “the PUC’s decision is wrong and HOB will be pursuing every possible option for an expedited review by the Supreme Court to reverse the decision and save jobs.”

Meanwhile, project opponents hailed the commission’s decision.

Marco Mangelsdorf, president of ProVision Solar, a Big Island renewable energy firm, said the decision goes to show that, despite deep pockets and the influence of Honua Ola, “it’s possible for justice and the health of the aina to prevail.”

“With the bounty of truly green renewable energy sources that bless Hawaii island, we certainly can and must do better than chopping down living trees and combusting them for decades. This commission is to be heartily commended,” Mangelsdorf said in an email.

As proposed, Honua Ola Bioenergy would launch a plant that would generate 21.5 megawatts of power. The company formed in 2008 to convert the old Hilo Coast Processing Co. plant in Pepeekeo into a biomass plant that would burn trees. The plant formerly burned sugar cane waste material and coal.

But a legal challenge by the environmental group Life of the Land landed the project at the state Supreme Court, which eventually ordered the PUC to reconsider the power purchase agreement.

In July the commission dismissed the project’s power purchase agreement while allowing Honua Ola to compete in the next request for proposals for renewable energy projects.

Wednesday’s decision upholds that order.

In its statement, Honua Ola said it was “shocked and disappointed” the PUC made this decision without conducting an investigation of “the fraudulent letters submitted to discredit the overwhelming number of comments in support of the project.”

“We find it reprehensible the Commission would abdicate its responsibility for thoroughly investigating this matter and suppressing the voices of thousands of supporters of this project in favor of a hasty ruling,” the statement said.

Earlier this month the company accused Henry Curtis, the leader of Life of the Land, of trying to sabotage its regulatory appeal by sending fake emails to the PUC. Curtis has denied the allegation.

Contacted Wednesday, Curtis not only maintained his innocence but said he’s retained specialized experts who are prepared to debunk the company’s allegations.

Honua Ola contends that its wood-burning plant would help the state reach its ambitious goal for transitioning entirely from power plants that burn oil and other fossil fuels to plants that use renewable fuels.

In its filings for the project, the company has argued the plant would “avoid the emission of hundreds of thousands of tons of CO2.” It has also asserted that its operations will be carbon neutral, with the replanting of trees offsetting the carbon emissions of the power production process.

However, there are scientific studies that not only contradict that conclusion but suggest that such plants could actually worsen the consequences of climate change. The studies contend that carbon neutrality cannot be achieved when considering the emissions produced during logging and processing of the wood.