http://hdl.handle.net/10125/21320 Fri, 24 May 2013 23:06:04 GMT 2013-05-24T23:06:04Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33714 The Hawaii Integrated Energy Assessment (HIEA) is designed to aid decision makers in Hawaii as they plan the transition from nearly total dependence upon oil to a mix of renewable, indigenous energy resources during the next 25 years. Recognition that an integrated assessment of Hawaii's energy future would be useful during this transition grew out of discussions between the State of Hawaii Department of Planning and Economic Development (DPED) and the San Francisco Operations Office of the United States Department of Energy (DOE). Subsequently commissioned by DOE with funding from its Office of Solar Strategy, Analysis and Integration, and the Office of Resource Applications, with further assistance from the State of Hawaii, this study was undertaken as a collaborative effort by the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory and DPED. This assessment is intended to be as realistic as possible in its analysis of the prospects for commercial evolution of the energy technologies that are appropriate for Hawaii and in its examination of the many-faceted implications of developing those technologies. As a result, the HIEA conclusions may be more restrained than those with a more optimistic range of opinions might expect. This report offers a series of views of possible future events. Like any other look into the future, it becomes more tenuous the farther it reaches. It is not intended as a definitive evaluation of the alternate energy technologies it considers nor as a precise forecast of things to come. The basic analytical models used in the assessment, however, will continue to be useful tools if updated data are introduced over the years. The transition to indigenous energy resources will call for a sequence of aggressive, informed decisions as the real future unfolds. It is hoped that the information presented in the seven volumes of the HIEA report will provide a sound basis for these decisions. The many experts from diverse fields and institutions who participated in these studies are acknowledged in the appropriate volumes. We commemorate here the late Dr. Eugene M. Grabbe, former Manager of the DPED's State Center for Science Policy and Technology Assessment, for his key role in initiating the project and guiding its earliest work. Mon, 01 Jun 1981 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33714 1981-06-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33713 The Hawaii Integrated Energy Assessment (HIEA) is designed to aid decision makers in Hawaii as they plan the transition from nearly total dependence upon oil to a mix of renewable, indigenous energy resources during the next 25 years. Recognition that an integrated assessment of Hawaii's energy future would be useful during this transition grew out of discussions between the State of Hawaii Department of Planning and Economic Development (DPED) and the San Francisco Operations Office of the United States Department of Energy (DOE). Subsequently commissioned by DOE with funding from its Office of Solar Strategy, Analysis and Integration, and the Office of Resource Applications, with further assistance from the State of Hawaii, this study was undertaken as a collaborative effort by the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory and DPED. This assessment is intended to be as realistic as possible in its analysis of the prospects for commercial evolution of the energy technologies that are appropriate for Hawaii and in its examination of the many-faceted implications of developing those technologies. As a result, the HIEA conclusions may be more restrained than those with a more optimistic range of opinions might expect. This report offers a series of views of possible future events. Like any other look into the future, it becomes more tenuous the farther it reaches. It is not intended as a definitive evaluation of the alternate energy technologies it considers nor as a precise forecast of things to come. The basic analytical models used in the assessment, however, will continue to be useful tools if updated data are introduced over the years. The transition to indigenous energy resources will call for a sequence of aggressive, informed decisions as the real future unfolds. It is hoped that the information presented in the seven volumes of the HIEA report will provide a sound basis for these decisions. The many experts from diverse fields and institutions who participated in these studies are acknowledged in the appropriate volumes. We commemorate here the late Dr. Eugene M. Grabbe, former Manager of the DPED's State Center for Science Policy and Technology Assessment, for his key role in initiating the project and guiding its earliest work. Thu, 01 Jan 1981 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33713 1981-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33712 As the most energy-vulnerable state in the nation, Hawaii depends on imported oil for over 90% of its energy. About half of that oil comes from Alaska and the other half from Asia/Pacific oil producing nations. Both oil production in Alaska and the export capacities of Asia/Pacific sources are projected to decline by roughly 50% by the year 2000. This will likely increase Hawaii's dependence on oil reserves of the politically unstable Middle East region. Environmental protection is also a major concern for Hawaii and its residents. Energy production from fossil fuels is the major source of local and global air pollutants, while petroleum shipping and handling pose risks to fragile marine habitats and coastal resort areas. An energy policy that internalizes the environmental and social costs of fossil fuels will place added value on energy efficiency and renewable energy, but could result in an increase in the market price of energy to consumers. Hawaii has a significant, and yet relatively untapped; renewable energy and energy-efficiency resource potential. Biomass, wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, and ocean resources can provide clean, stable sources of energy supply. The islands' energy savings potential is likely to allow utilities to defer the need to construct additional fossil fuel-fired power plants by reducing electricity demand through conservation and increased energy efficiency. Efficiency gains in the transportation sector are also possible. All of these considerations, coupled with the fact that Hawaii is no less dependent on imported oil today than it was during the first oil crisis of 1973-74, point to the need for the State's government to create a more effective energy policy development and planning process. Hawaii recognized that such a process would have to involve both the general public and the direct representation of Hawaii's "energy community." Sun, 01 Dec 1991 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33712 1991-12-01T00:00:00Z Energy Division, Dept. of Business, Economic Development & Tourism, State of Hawaii http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33708 Mr. Peter Chatto's Request Haase (Hiwa Hiwa Ventures) Resources Mining Lease No. Hawaii and Puna Geothermal Parcel 5 of Tax Map Plat: on Behalf of Mr. Joseph for Removal of Geothermal R-4 Between the State of Venture Affecting Title to 3rd Div./1-4-16. Geothermal related records requested by Peter Chatto (RA) who represents Mr. Joseph Naase of Hiwa Hiwa Ventures who owns a 4.3 acre parcel of land in the Kapoho area of the Big Island. Documents include mining leases R-1 and R-2, related correspondence from various State of Hawaii entities, response correspondence from Mr. Chatto, Release of Tax Map Key, handwritten notes, Assignment of Leases and Agreements and related exhibits. Thu, 01 Jan 31609 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33708 31609-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33707 This document presents a monthly report to the County of Hawaii Planning Department to support the scientific observation hole (SOHs) program in the Kilauea middle and lower east rift zone. The SOHs are for scientific observation purposes only. The holes will not be flow-tested or produced. The information to be gained from the SOHs will provide an assessment of subsurface geological conditions, groundwater level and composition, temperature, drilling conditions, an inventory of possible mineral and geothermal resources, and an eruptive history of the island to the depth drilled. This report addresses: occurrence and duration of any startup, shut-down, and operation mode of any SOH/facility; performance testing, evaluation, calibration checks, and adjustment and maintenance of the continuous emission monitor(s) that have been installed; and emission measurements. Includes drilling reports, related correspondence and handwritten notes specific to Lilewa, Kapoho, and Halekamahina, Hawaii TMK: 1-2-10:01; 1-4-01:02; and 1-4-02:32. Mon, 21 Aug 1989 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33707 1989-08-21T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33706 In accordance with Rule 12, I hereby submit my final report on the mediation of Geothermal Resource Permit Application 87-1. The primary work products of these mediations are enclosed in Sections 4 and 5. They are the result of more than sixty hours of exhausting and occasionally contentious face-to-face discussions between the applicant and various members and representatives of the community and the County. The parties who requested mediation worked extremely hard to complete this process. Recognizing that it was greatly constrained by conditions not of their own making, most stayed at the table and arduously worked through the larger issues involved in PGV"s proposed project. The overall result is, from my personal point of view, some courageous and potentially precedent-setting recommendations. While these recommendations do not come to the Commission with the full and complete unanimity of all of the parties who signed up for mediation, they represent the highest level of consensus possible in this forum at this time given its limitations and constraints. Some matters that were discussed and around which recommendations were framed are still ambiguous and should not be viewed as fully perfected agreements. Noise issues in particular need additional time and attention. The accomplishments of this mediation in this area are significant, however, and I am hopeful that these and any other remaining issues can quickly be resolved by the parties or by the Commission to the satisfaction of everyone concerned. In forwarding this report, I also want to fully acknowledge the legitimate differences of opinion that still exist between some of the parties to the mediation. Inevitably, questions will continue to be raised about geothermal development in general and about PGV's project in particular. The comments of the parties themselves are very important in this regard. I make no claim to perfection. I have tried to fairly and accurately describe this mediation process and its results. Also bear in mind that the mediation moved very fast and covered a tremendous amount of ground. Wherever I have understated, overstated, misstated or left out what has transpired, I encourage the parties themselves - jointly or separately - to be in touch with the Commission to rectify my mistakes. The recommendations and aareements that they worked on ultimately belong to them and it is they who must have the final say. Finally, I would ask all readers of this report to be aware of the positive (and in some cases, extraordinary) accomplishments that are coming out of this process. The community, the County, and the applicant have managed to work through many disagreements and find some areas of common ground that did not exist before the mediation process started. This kind of collaboration is of great value. There is power in consensus and it takes persistence, courage and trust to create it. I have served as a mediator on many difficult disputes but I especially commend these parties to the Commission and to any other readers of this report. They are fine people who have accomplished a great deal and I am honored to have been a part of their discussions. Fri, 04 Dec 1992 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33706 1992-12-04T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33705 As a result of recommendations made in the "Independent Technical Investigation of the Puna Geothermal Venture Unplanned Steam Release", of June 12-13, 1991, the Department of Land and Natural Resources has contracted the preparation of the Hawaii Geothermal Blowout Prevention Manual. This document is intended to provide clear guidance that both regulatory agencies and geothermal development organizations can use for plans and procedures regarding blowout prevention in their Hawaii drilling activities. The enclosed draft of the Manual is designed to improve operational and safety procedures for ALL geothermal drilling activities in the State. Thu, 30 Jun 1988 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33705 1988-06-30T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33704 As the Energy Resources Coordinator (ERC) for the State of Hawaii, it is my pleasure to present this annual report on the progress of energy activities undertaken in the State during Fiscal Year 1987/1988 (FY 87/88) to the Administration, the Legislature, and the people of Hawaii. The report covers both public and private sector programs as mandated under the provisions of Section 196-4 (11) Hawaii Revised Statutes. Mon, 05 Jun 1989 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33704 1989-06-05T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33703 Transcript taken at the Hawaiian Electric Company Auditorium, 900 Richards Street, Second Floor 11 Auditorium, Honolulu, Hawaii, on Monday, June 5, 1989, at approximately 9:14a.m., as reported by Stephen B. Platt, Registered Professional Reporter, CSR No. 248, a Notary Public in and for the State of Hawaii at Large. Moderator: Richard K. McQuain, 20 Vice President of Engineering, HECO. Sat, 01 Jan 1994 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33703 1994-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33702 Includes abandonment plan, draft license, well diagrams, rules/laws regarding well abandonment, general correspondence and drilling activity reports for Well KA1-1. Sun, 01 Jan 1989 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33702 1989-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33701 The applicant is True Geothermal Energy Company, the Operator for True/MidPacific Geothermal Venture for the mining operations permitted under State Geothermal Mining Lease No. R-5 dated July 23, 1987 and issued to the Estate of James Campbell, Lessee. By Sub-lease Agreement between Campbell Estate and True Geothermal Energy Company and Mid-Pacific Geothermal, Inc., dated December 3, 1986, Campbell Estate assigned its rights to True/Mid-Pacific Geothermal Venture to drill for, produce and take geothermal resources from the lands leased under any state mining lease issued to Campbell Estate on the lands described in the sublease. By Operating Agreement between True Geothermal Energy Company and Mid-Pacific Geothermal, Inc., dated October 5, 1982, True is designated as "Operator" and Mid-Pacific as "Non-Operator" for the geothermal venture. The operator is responsible for all drilling operations under the terms and conditions of the mining lease. Agent for the operator is Mr. Allan Kawada whose address is: True Geothermal Energy Co., 888 Mililani Street, 8th Floor, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813-2918, Tel: 528-3496. Tue, 29 Jan 1991 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33701 1991-01-29T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33700 Pursuant to the tenas and conditions of the Decision and Order of the Board of Land and Natural Resources dated Apr11 11, 1986, a full archaeological survey is to be conducted and approved prior to any clearing activities for each drill site and roads in the project area. This survey, which is called an archaeological inventory survey by our department, is to cover all areas to be cleared for construction and an area two to five times that to be developed. The procedures for the survey work are spelled out in the Research Design called for in the Decision and Order, with this design having been amended by joint agreement in the Fall of 1990 to accomodate the potential presence of lava tubes with significant historic remains at or in the vicinity of proposed well sites. To comply with this survey requirement, True Geothermal Energy Company has conducted an archaeological inventory survey of proposed Well Site Number 2 and a buffer quadrat around it. This survey has been done in three fieldwork increments. Results of the first two increments were sublitted to the Department in separate reports (Reports of Archaeological Consultants of Hawaii dated September 6, 1990 and October 26, 1990). After reviewing these two reports, it was concluded by our department that the survey methods for the two increments already completed had to be clarified in the report and that the survey fieldwork had not yet adequately covered the project area specified in the revised Research Design, necessitating a third increment of fieldwork. Wed, 01 Jan 1986 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33700 1986-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33699 The subzone area is designated on the attached map identified as the Kilauea Lower East Rift (Kapoho Section) Geothermal Resource Subzone. The subzone area contains approximately 5, 636 acres, more or less, and is located west of Leilani Estates and extends eastward to Cape Kumukahi. The attached map defining the boundaries of the designated subzone is adapted from the U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps - Pahoa North, Pahoa South, and Kapoho Quadrangles. Mon, 01 Jan 1996 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33699 1996-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33698 Correspondence, memos, scientific observations, rift zone diagrams/maps, and handwritten notes regarding the Geothermal Resource Mining Lease R-5. "Geothermal License" agreement which allows the Department of Land and Natural Resources to monitor KA-1 geothermal well and SOH-4 well. Thu, 01 May 1986 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33698 1986-05-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33697 Pursuant to Sections 205-5.1 and 205-5.2, Hawaii Revised Statues, as amended by Act 151, SLH 1984; and Title 13, Chapter 184, Hawaii Administrative Rules, as amended; the Board of Land and Natural Resources, State of Hawaii, has designated the Kilauea Lower East Rift (Kapoho Section), Island of Hawaii, as a Geothermal Resource Subzone (GRS). The boundary of the subzone area designated on the attached map is identified as the Kilauea Lower East Rift (Kapoho Section) Geothermal Resource Subzone. The subzone area includes geothermal resource mining leases - GRML R-2, GRML R-3, and S-4602, and contains approximately 7,353 acres, more or less, and is located west of Leilani Estates and extends eastward to Cape Kumukahi. Mon, 01 May 1989 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33697 1989-05-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33696 Exhibits are discussed in RFP Section 2.5. These exhibits should be filled out or otherwise used to identify the requested material. These are meant as a guide only. Blank lines are provided on some Exhibits for responses. If the space provided is not sufficient, the Exhibits may be retyped. In other cases, the Exhibit will become the title or first page of the response. Wed, 01 Jan 1986 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33696 1986-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33695 Pursuant to Sections 205-5.1 and 205-5.2, Hawaii Revised Statutes, as amended by Act 151, Session Laws of Hawaii 1984; and Title 13, Chapter 184, Administrative Rules, as amended; the Board of Land and Natural Resources, State of Hawaii, has designated the Kilauea Lower East Rift (Kamaili Section), Island of Hawaii, as a Geothermal Resource Subzone ( GRS). The subzone area is designated on the attached map identified as the Kilauea Lower East Rift (Kamaili Section) Geothermal Resource Subzone. The subzone area contains approximately 5,555 acres, more or less, and is located west of the Kilauea Middle East Rift GRS and east of Leilani Estates, Puna, Hawaii. Sat, 01 Jan 2000 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33695 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33694 Pursuant to Rule 12-9(a) of the Planning Commission Rules, Puna Geothermal Venture (PGV) requests the County of Hawaii Planning Commission's approval of certain amendments to the existing Geothermal Resource Permit (GRP) issued October 3, 1989. In light of the increased demand for energy production since the issuance of the GRP, PGV seeks an increase in the maximum level of electricity which may be generated by PGV's geothermal operation. When the GRP was issued in 1989, the Island of Hawaii consumed a peak of 130 MW of electrical energy. Consumption since then has steadily increased to a 170 MW peak in 1999. With the anticipated growth of the Island, it is expected that the peak requirement will increase 3-4 MW each year. PGV proposes to help meet this growing energy need and can do so within the next two to five years with its existing production wells. In addition, the ability to add to the generating capability of the plant could be done in a cost effective manner without increasing any risk to public health or welfare. In the past twelve years, there have been advancements in the technology and methodology of generating electricity from geothermal steam. PGV seeks the ability to use more efficient and effective equipment in its operation and has provided herein certain amendments in the description of the categories of equipment that can be used. Since the GRP was originally issued, much has also transpired in the context of the regulation of geothermal energy production. Permits and regulatory oversight by other agencies with expertise in the area now overlap some of the existing conditions of the GRP. Specific standards relating to matters such as noise and air emissions have since been promulgated by other agencies. Amendments are proposed to GRP conditions to acknowledge the jurisdiction of other agencies and to diminish inconsistency and overlapping with the standards and requirements of other agencies. The passage of time also requires a review of the original structuring and administration of the Geothermal Asset Fund that was established pursuant to the terms of the GRP and to which PGV has made annual contributions of $50,000. The fund is now in excess of $1 Million and continues to earn interest. The total amount of claims against the Geothermal Asset Fund which have been approved since the inception of the Fund do not exceed $1,800. Sat, 01 Jan 1994 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33694 1994-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33693 Documents related to the Water Well Monitoring Program for Geothermal Development Monitoring, Kilauea Lower East Rift Zone, Kapoho Shaft Well Right-of-Entry. Part of this program will be to install low capacity sampling pumps in five wells in the lower Puna area. Accordingly, we would appreciate your approval to accP.ss and install a pump in the Kapoho Shaft well. We wish to monitor the well approximately once every two weeks for an indefinite period of time. We understand that the Department of Water Supply plan to abandon this well. The pump to be installed is a Model ST1101P which was purchased from QED Groundwater Specialists, 6095 Jackson Road, P.O. Box 3726, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106, (800) 624-2026 and is of stainless steel construction. All materials which will be installed in the well will meet EPA drinking water standards. Upon completion of our work, the pump and all materials will be removed and the site restored as near as practicable to its original condition. Sun, 01 Jan 1989 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33693 1989-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33692 Notes summarizing the discussions held with the PCC end Pele Defense Fund representatives. Includes memorandum regarding the February 23, 1989 Meeting, Puna Community Council/DB ED Summary of Community's Concerns, handwritten notes, geothermal roundtable ground rules and agenda, and meeting minutes. Tue, 01 Apr 1986 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10524/33692 1986-04-01T00:00:00Z