Posts: 11,016
Threads: 750
Joined: Sep 2012
That's reasonable right?
Who decides the quantity of desecration/problems?
People who believe the water table will be polluted by a zero emission observatory?
People who imagine the TMT is nuclear powered?
I’m quite sure those folks could find desecration whenever it’s required to fit their agenda.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 14,107
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
Who decides the quantity of desecration/problems?
You had me at "let's decommission", shouldn't that already be happening? No rule of law means no need to wait for an EIS, right?
Posts: 735
Threads: 20
Joined: May 2006
quote:
Originally posted by EightFingers
Do the Canary Islands have protesters...err...protectors too?
The indigenous people of the Canaries were the Guanche. They were largely exterminated by the Spanish in the 15th century although some elements of their culture does remain according to Wiki. It's doubtful they would protest against TMT.
Posts: 703
Threads: 15
Joined: Jun 2013
"Do the Canary Islands have protesters...err...protectors too?"
appearantly they do
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2019/08/06...ming-here/
-----------------------------------------------------------
"You had me at "let's decommission", shouldn't that already be happening? No rule of law means no need to wait for an EIS, right?"
Yes, I think it should have been happening already. What a corp. signs off on in the 70's or 80's as part of their lease agreement (restoration per environmental regulations ) was most likely minuscule in comparison to the requirements of today. Time lost = more cost.
And have wondered since I read the article on the hydraulic fuel spill that might have seeped into the ground. How will this be known without starting the decommission process, removing part of the slab and sampling the soil?
Posts: 11,016
Threads: 750
Joined: Sep 2012
Yes, I think it should have been happening already.
The observatories can’t start decommissioning when they feel like it. Or when people illegally assembled in a public road tell them to. They are waiting for the proper permits and required legal documents, just like the TMT had to do before they received the final OK to began construction.
They’re following the letter of the law. A novel concept?
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 363
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2015
quote:
Originally posted by HereOnThePrimalEdge
That's reasonable right?
Who decides the quantity of desecration/problems?
People who believe the water table will be polluted by a zero emission observatory?
People who imagine the TMT is nuclear powered?
I’m quite sure those folks could find desecration whenever it’s required to fit their agenda.
Those are really fringe arguments. There are barely anyone who believes those things.
Also you guys keep mentioning laws. Well it's really convenient when one side gets to adjust the laws to suit their agenda.
Just one telescope, no 3, 10, 14 will be the last I promise.
We'll start taking down obsolete telescopes immediately. Actually we'll wait till after the TMT starts.
Then it's conservation land and should not be destroyed. Oh, the first 13 already destroyed the land? Go ahead and throw another up there.
Here's your Hawaiian homelands, wait we need to build on the shores so we'll swap with you and you get up by the Mauna. Wait we need the land for telescopes.
No buildings can be over a certain size! Oh TMT you're good build as high as you need. You need a bond to build! Oh TMT you can't afford one right now? Build away we trust you.
Posts: 209
Threads: 4
Joined: Feb 2017
quote:
Originally posted by HereOnThePrimalEdge
They’re following the letter of the law. A novel concept?
They are following a letter of a set of laws, what's really the question here is jurisdiction.
"Furthermore, the University of Hawai’i cannot escape the fact that even the United States Congress, in its Apology Resolution in 1993 (107 Stat. 1512), admitted that the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom government was not only unlawful but that the so-called transfer of Hawaiian government and crown lands, which included the ahupua’a of Ka’ohe, to the United States in 1898, was done “without the consent of or compensation to the Native Hawaiian people of Hawai’i or their sovereign [Hawaiian Kingdom] government.” This was not known in 1968.
The United States did not acquire title to Ka’ohe in 1898, therefore it could not convey what it didn’t have to the State of Hawai’i in 1959. Consequently, the State of Hawai’i could not lease what it didn’t have to the University of Hawai’i in 1968, and, therefore, the University of Hawai’i could not sublease what it didn’t have to TMT. When Congress admitted that the transfer of the property occurred without consent, it is also an admission of who the true owner of the fee-simple title to Ka’ohe is, which isn’t the United States nor the State of Hawai’i. The University of Hawai’i’s general lease needs to be understood in this light, which clearly makes it invalid, and, therefore, the sublease to TMT is invalid."
http://mauicounty.us/wp-content/uploads/...ndence.pdf
Posts: 3,212
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2009
Again, the U.S. Supreme Court has already settled this in 2008/9 - the State of Hawaii owns title to the lands outright.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apology_Resolution
"The legal effect of the Apology Resolution was addressed in the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court of March 31, 2009, which held that the 37 "whereas" clauses of the Apology Resolution have no binding legal effect, nor does it convey any rights or make any legal findings for native Hawaiian claims. The Court concluded that the Resolution does not change or modify the "absolute" title to the public lands of the State of Hawai'i. The decision also affirmed that federal legislation cannot retroactively alter a title given as a part of statehood in general."
Or for more legal analysis - https://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/art...lic-lands/
"The Court said that neither of the two substantive provisions of the apology resolution – one that apologized for the role of the U.S. in overthrowing the Hawaiian monarchy, and another that disclaimed that the resolution served to settle any claims against the U.S. – affected Hawaii's right to sell the land granted it by the U.S. when Hawaii was admitted as a state."
Posts: 1,975
Threads: 47
Joined: Jul 2012
It’s time to appoint a special prosecutor from out of state to replace Mitch Roth until construction can resume.
Posts: 10,214
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
reni,
"Yes, I think it should have been happening already. What a corp. signs off on in the 70's or 80's as part of their lease agreement (restoration per environmental regulations ) was most likely minuscule in comparison to the requirements of today. Time lost = more cost.
And have wondered since I read the article on the hydraulic fuel spill that might have seeped into the ground. How will this be known without starting the decommission process, removing part of the slab and sampling the soil?"
There's a difference in the lease agreements between the older and newer observatories. The newer ones have to restore the site to its original condition, the older ones have a very similar agreement but it's not quite the same although I forget the wording, I will have to research it over the next day or so, but it's something like restoring the site but not quite to the original condition. I think it means anything underground could potentially be left there as long as it is covered up. But please don't quote me on that.
In any case, the process of decommissioning an observatory is just as complicated as building a new one, possibly even more complicated. The example you mention of not knowing how the decommissioning will proceed due to a previous but very small spill is exactly what the CSO is going through right now.
Of course, the two decommisioned observatories could be removed quite quickly, but only if the laws are broken, and the observatories are clearly not going to do that.
|
