Thirty Meter Telescope and Island Politics

[JerryCarr]

Last week, I expressed my desire to hear a question on the Thirty Meter Telescope asked at the Council Forum on Saturday. Dr. James Weatherford appropriately suggested that I do some research on the economic impact of the TMT. So I did, and here is the first round:

The thing that first struck me was the lack of such data on, of all places, the TMT website. http://www.tmt.org/ There is a ton of interesting stuff there, but with the anticipated cultural and environmental opposition that they clearly recognize, one would think they would have some nice juicy money stuff there to tempt the prospective host. I sent them an email suggesting that they fix this. (Or if the info is there somewhere, and I just missed it, to make it more visible.)

So not finding anything there, I turned to the academics at the University of Hawaii. Sure enough, they had some stuff, albeit somewhat dated. As Dr. Weatherford suspected (and I should have known) the $1.1 billion will indeed not all be spent here. According to this 2000 report http://www.hawaii.edu/maunakea/appendix_m.pdf , about 20% of the actual project capital cost would be spent on the Big Island. That would still amount to about $220 million, a tidy sum. (Note that this report refers to the TMT as the "next generation large optical/IR telescope.") The same report states that there will be approximately 120 new jobs created, but they do not give a breakdown on salaries. I looked up astronomer salaries on monster.com and the median is $93,000 per annum, but I imagine only about a dozen or so of the new jobs will be at this level. The rest however, will tend to be more technical/computer types, although they will still need custodial help, etc. Overall, I think we can safely say that the new jobs will average at least at the current Big Island median and probably higher.

The promised scholarship money is via Senator Inouye's office. Of course politicians promises are always suspect, but at least this one has history of delivering pork. Here is the link for the Senator's promise: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/p.../808100379

I also found a UH report from 2003: http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/publications/s...-Oct03.pdf This report states that the annual operating expense of the TMT on the Big Island will be on the order of $50 million. The actual impact of that sum would increase with circulation in the economy.

So that is the first round of research. I'm still looking for more recent and detailed data, but I remain convinced that the economic value would be outstanding. The TMT people need to work much harder on cultural sensitivity and start seriously dealing with the concerns of Native Hawaiians and environmentalists. Our local candidates and politicians need to facilitate such a discourse post haste before this opportunity is lost.

The prestige and ripple effect value of having or not having the TMT is hard to quantify. I do know, however, that an isolated place in the middle of the ocean with few natural resources other than scenic beauty needs more than tourism and real estate development as its economic base. Scientific research is something that is already being done here with success. Rejecting the TMT out of hand sends the wrong message to the scientific world.

Cheers,
Jerry

[Guest]

Jerry -

If you feel like investigating something, I'd like to know more about this Oahu company that keeps getting these big money contracts to run polls that keep coming out in favor of the companies that are sponsoring them. TMT, Superferry...what else?

I wrote a snippet on it here


-------
Glob

[Rob Tucker]

At a forum recently Lorraine Inouye was asked about the telescope and local jobs. She replied that she believed that there were some local hires for custodial and maintenance purposes. I do not know for a fact but have reason to believe that the major construction will be of a very specialized nature and except for concrete and grading the trades are likely to be imported.

I do not mention this to discredit the science of the project.

The Mauna Kea science history is very typical of Hawaiian history in general and from a local perspective consists of those with power and money doing exactly what they want when they want and where they want.

It may seem obstructionist to not immediately welcome another large telescope venture doing what it wants when it wants without consulting the host culture. The desire by groups such as the Kanaka Council and others to not let the powers assume that Mauna Kea is theirs for the taking is a change, and not necessarily for the worst.

It resembles the CDP process where in the past the big decisions were made by the few to the benefit of the few. Community activism changes that formula. As we watch that plantation era format fade we will see it change in more than one sphere. Astronomy included.

As for seeking local input. The State of Hawaii DOT is another typical case and it's history is worth considering in respect to Mauna Kea. The DOT (large government money spending department) has finally learned that (due to losing federal lawsuits) it needs to take community input. It still has not grasped the concept of actually listening to community input. DOT just takes the meeting notes and buries it all in a file somewhere and checks off a box on a form.

So consider that when you see someone like Kale Gumapac say he is opposed to the 30 meter telescope that there may be valuable negotiating points and precedent to consider. There may be more depth there than a simple knee jerk reaction.

Best thing to do in my opinion is to simply ask Kale about it personally. I know the Pahoa forum, with 60 second time bites, didn't allow for depth of answers. Hopefully Kale, who is very busy right now, might see this topic and have the time to expand.

I have learned to assume the best and ask questions.....

[james weatherford]

Jerry,

Many thanks for that... 'reckoned you were on the hunt

The 20% on-the-ground spending is a useful benchmark for comparing other proposals. The distribution of jobs and salaries would also be usable in comparisons.

Certainly, the on-the-ground spending and the annual operations are relevant. There may also be non-tangible benefits, i.e., the scientific center status.

There are also costs -- real and non-tangible. The cost of anything is what you give up to have it. Honest inquiry for the telescope, geothermal, 4-lane highway, Super ferry, wind farm, alternate Puna road, whatever: What do we give up to have it?



James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park

[JerryCarr]

Accepting the TMT as initially offered, without conditions or negotiation, would be unwise and bad business. For one thing, the rent money paid by the astronomy sector, currently $1 per year, needs to go up across the board, and not just for the TMT. Something more reasonable would go a long way toward funding Sen. Inouye's scholarships and/or other initiatives to advance educational and cultural causes on the Island.

It would also help if TMT offered a training program for technical support positions that would guarantee the hiring of local residents. If done in conjunction with UH-Hilo or the Community College, such a training program could become a permanent asset and money maker by attracting students from around the world once the TMT is staffed. With first use of the telescope anticipated in 2018, there is plenty of time to get such a program going, and they could even start with middle and high school age students. By diverting just 5% of their overall budget to such efforts, they could do a lot.

The TMT people have at least chosen a somewhat less prominent site on the mountain, and that stance might indicate a willingness to be more sensitive on other points. And as noted in my first post, they really need to get some verifiable economic data out front.

So I do not propose offering TMT carte blanche on their proposal. They need to be prepared to offset the tangible and intangible costs of what they plan to do. They really should have thought about a lot of this stuff way before now. If they had, they could end up doint a lot less damage control and remedial PR than they might otherwise.

Cheers,
Jerry

[Rob Tucker]

It would be very interesting to know who their paid consultants are. Very often they are former public officials. Lawyers usually.

[Mitzi M]

I think it would be very interesting to look into the current employment stats of the existing telescopes here. I have a friend who moved to the Big Island for a job at one of them. He is an electronics engineer, who applied and was hired while living on the mainland. He was offered a very handsome sum for moving expenses and decided to buy a house here rather than rent. His salary was just north of 50K. Every day he reported to work in Hilo and then took the shuttle up. About a year later he was laid off along with 13 other co-workers because the grant which paid his salary was not renewed. He put his house up for sale and moved back to the mainland. I asked him why he didn't look for another job at another observatory and he told me nobody else was hiring, and besides, he wasn't really happy at the job anyhow.

Often I hear about how we should support a new resort or development because of all the glorious jobs it will create. Often those jobs are low paying, uncertain and lead nowhere. I think its important to really look at the jobs that would be created and decide if they are truly beneficial and to whom.

Nor should the cultural impact of development at the summit of Mauna Kea be overlooked or understated. Building our local economy is of primary importance, but there are many creative ways we can accomplish this.

Aloha,
Mitzi

[james weatherford]

My training and experience as an economist inevitably leads me to some numbers and to non-numeric reasoning about resource allocation.
A basic principle I would put up to consider, for telescopes or whatever, is the imperative of community-empowerment.
Mega-scale technology, industrial, and/or extraction ventures owned by non-resident corporations do not, in general, empower a community and many are the cases of such ventures encumbering a community.
For example: are strategic decisions made in the community? do operating profits remain in the community?


James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park

[Greg]

This letter and also this letter to the editor in today's West Hawaii Today make some excellent points about rents and cultural aspects of the TMT.

[Kapohocat]

I would tie big-telescope-business to increasing with REAL MONEY the astronomy and physics and other programs at UH Hilo.

They want to expand/increase etc - then put some real money into the advanced education system here.

There is no way UH Hilo should have none or substandard astronomy / geology / physics / engineering programs. They all should be world class along with a world class rural medicine nursing program.

Whew! I better take my rose colored glasses off! [:I]