Mahalo for supporting Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Enjoy this free story!
On Oct. 15, 2006, an earthquake jiggled a mercury switch at Oahu’s Kahe power plant, knocking out power to the island. The lights were out almost everywhere, except at Karen Young’s Waianae home. She had installed solar power with battery backup a year earlier — one of the first such systems on Oahu. With her refrigerator humming and lights on, Karen at the time had the most reliable electricity on Oahu. You could call it “firm” power.
Our journey to 100% renewable energy should move at the speed of innovation. Which is why a legislative attempt to prescribe specific technologies — under the guise of “firm power” — is poorly conceived. Senate Bill 2510 will slow Hawaii’s current rapid transformation to low-cost renewable energy by limiting the growth of any one resource — regardless of its reliability or cost-effectiveness.
Let’s be clear on our goal: Low-cost, low-carbon, reliable energy for all. Achieving that should be left to the experts — leveraging the power of innovation and the efficiency of the market.
No crystal ball reveals the optimal mix of clean energy sources 10 years down the road, let alone 20. The physicist Niels Bohr famously said, “It’s difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.”
Technology forecasts are fraught. In 2007, Hawaiian Electric anticipated that rooftop solar would grow to 23 megawatts (MW) in 2015. It missed the mark by a factor of 15. In 2015, Hawaii saw more than 345 MW of rooftop solar installed.
>> RELATED: Column: Senate Bill 2510 is a forward-looking, balanced plan for ‘green’ energy
By artificially setting percentages for the types of allowed renewable energy, SB 2510 constrains innovation and investment in the future.
University of Hawaii experts agree, writing in their SB 2510 testimony: “We are concerned that a legally-binding fixed minimum percentage of renewable energy from firm generation may be overly prescriptive, not yield optimal solutions, and likely slow Hawaii’s clean energy transition.”
With high percentages of solar energy, Kauai, Molokai and Lanai may be out of compliance with SB 2510 the minute it becomes law. Lanai would be prevented from adding its proposed solar-plus-storage project, and Maui would have to put the brakes on any new solar or wind.
Kauai — which has achieved two-thirds renewable energy (and 100% for hours most days) without any legislative tinkering — would not be able to develop its solar-powered pumped hydroelectric storage facility. This project will provide long-term energy storage to power the island through periods of little sunshine.
Which is what the debate around SB 2510 is purportedly about: ensuring that we have a constant supply of reliable power, irrespective of what Mother Nature provides.
In the past, this meant burning things. Most of Hawaii’s “firm” renewable power comes from burning organic mass and boiling water. Such thermal power plants are inefficient, dirty and expensive. Moreover, any land dedicated for energy crops should grow transportation fuels, where the need for renewable alternatives is greatest.
Today, new technology is filling the gaps in solar and wind energy, making them available 24/7/365.
Since Karen installed her rudimentary energy storage system nearly 20 years ago, about 10,000 modern battery systems have been put into use statewide. While these store energy for only short durations, new battery chemistries may provide for weeks or months. Hard to imagine? Look at the leaps in storing data. The 2001 iPod had 5 gigabytes of storage, holding what was then a mind-boggling 1,000 songs. Mobile phones today offer 100 times that capacity.
Beyond batteries, the energy storage space is evolving rapidly. Hydrogen, gravity storage, liquid air, compressed air and pumped hydro are actively being commercialized.
Which one will be our low-cost winner? That’s for the future to decide.
Prescribing today what pathway technology will take should not be a legislative matter. Imagine if lawmakers 25 years ago — over concerns about the stability of cell phone connections at the time — mandated that 50% of all future communications be done by a “firm” landline. What effect would that have had on the ubiquity, convenience and cost of mobile communications today?
By relying on outdated notions of “firm” power, SB 2510’s rigid requirements will frustrate our clean energy progress. On this Yogi Berra nailed it: “The future ain’t what it used to be.”
—
Highlights of energy bill
Amid much debate, Senate Bill 2510 was passed by Hawaii’s Legislature and is now before the governor, who could veto it, sign it or let it become law without his signature. Among other things, the bill:
>> Says “firm” renewable energy shall be a minimum of 33.33% of renewable energy generation for each island.
>> Limits any one type of renewable energy source to 45% of all generation for each island, except for geothermal.
Jeff Mikulina is a longtime renewable-energy and sustainability advocate in Hawaii.
78