01-28-2015, 05:20 AM
Couple quick points for clarity:
The Relocation or Geothermal Asset Fund is separate from the royalties PGV pays - $3.1M in 2011-12, $1.6M (50%) to DLNR, $929K (30%) to County of Hawaii, $619K (20%) to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. These royalties become general funds without restrictions on their use.
http://www.hnei.hawaii.edu/sites/dev.hne...202013.pdf Page 16
The Relocation or Geothermal Asset Fund was largely included in PGV's Geothermal Resource Permit (GRP) as a response to the 1991 "blow-out" that the EPA states "occurred because of inadequacies in PGV’s drilling plan and procedures and not as a result of unusual or unmanageable subsurface geologic or hydrologic conditions."
http://www.epa.gov/eab/disk11/puna.pdf Page 9
The nighttime drilling ban (Bill 292 -> County Code 14-113) was passed after PGV's last well was drilled in 2012. While it was stated that the law would not affect PGV's current Geothermal Resource Permit, apparently County Council overlooked the drilling permit required from the DLNR for each new well? The law passed is overly simple and does not make any distinctions. http://www.hawaiicounty.gov/lb-file-revi...pter14.pdf Page 53
(cut and paste link)
Comparisons to geothermal plants elsewhere (Iceland, Germany, etc) tend to overlook that these developments are done with clear governmental oversight and legal requirements, including emission controls and adequate noise suppression. Unfortunately, this is not how geothermal has been done here, creating ongoing issues requiring efforts from residents and industry, as well as county, state, and federal government.
If the actual goal is efficiency and reduced electricity costs, there is plenty of room for improvement from all parties involved perhaps?
The Relocation or Geothermal Asset Fund is separate from the royalties PGV pays - $3.1M in 2011-12, $1.6M (50%) to DLNR, $929K (30%) to County of Hawaii, $619K (20%) to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. These royalties become general funds without restrictions on their use.
http://www.hnei.hawaii.edu/sites/dev.hne...202013.pdf Page 16
The Relocation or Geothermal Asset Fund was largely included in PGV's Geothermal Resource Permit (GRP) as a response to the 1991 "blow-out" that the EPA states "occurred because of inadequacies in PGV’s drilling plan and procedures and not as a result of unusual or unmanageable subsurface geologic or hydrologic conditions."
http://www.epa.gov/eab/disk11/puna.pdf Page 9
The nighttime drilling ban (Bill 292 -> County Code 14-113) was passed after PGV's last well was drilled in 2012. While it was stated that the law would not affect PGV's current Geothermal Resource Permit, apparently County Council overlooked the drilling permit required from the DLNR for each new well? The law passed is overly simple and does not make any distinctions. http://www.hawaiicounty.gov/lb-file-revi...pter14.pdf Page 53
(cut and paste link)
Comparisons to geothermal plants elsewhere (Iceland, Germany, etc) tend to overlook that these developments are done with clear governmental oversight and legal requirements, including emission controls and adequate noise suppression. Unfortunately, this is not how geothermal has been done here, creating ongoing issues requiring efforts from residents and industry, as well as county, state, and federal government.
If the actual goal is efficiency and reduced electricity costs, there is plenty of room for improvement from all parties involved perhaps?