Email This Story
Share This Story
Add to Bookmarks
Printer Friendly Version
8 Comments
Honolulu, Hawaii [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] In an effort to encourage ocean energy projects that the community supports, a group of approximately 30 stakeholders has developed guidelines to help potential developers of ocean energy power facilities plan and implement projects in Hawaii.
The Ocean Energy Development Guidelines describe what ocean developers need to do, such as communicate with the community early in the process and lead with a concept of giving back.
Specific issues that potential developers need to communicate with ocean stakeholders include the size and location of any proposed project, the technology to be used and risks to the natural environment, navigation and fishing, ocean recreation and homeland security. Cultural issues such as native Hawaiian traditional rights are discussed along with guidelines for assessing cultural impacts from the Office of Environmental Quality Control.
There is also a list of individuals who have offered to be resource contacts for potential ocean energy developers and to assist them in understanding concerns and navigating the community acceptance process.
The guidelines were developed by a group of individuals and organizations that represent environmental and Hawaiian cultural organizations, fishing, surfing, paddling and marine-life preservation interests, along with state agencies, the State Legislature and the United States Coast Guard.
In a letter, representatives of the sponsoring organizations noted, "Many good development projects have failed, or experienced costly and timely challenges in Hawaii, because developers have failed to engage with our community early and productively. We cannot afford to allow the development of good, sustainable alternative energy projects to fail."
The final document is available on-line at www.hawaiisenergyfuture.com.
Add Your Comment
8 Reader Comments
Comment
2 of 8 |
November 5, 2007
I just read the document - very well done.
I consider this required reading for any community with concerns about their environment - similar or otherwise (the Pacific NW comes to mind). This is an excellent template. I recommend this for developers as well. A wonderful insight to people you may not have dealt with before. Ask potential sites if they have a document like this. If not, ask them to make one. Win-win situations are the most successful. Again, I applaud the people who spent the time to put this together. I fear we mainlanders are more into confrontation than communication. |
|
Comment
3 of 8 |
November 5, 2007
How very clever. People who would normally be thot of as Luddites are taking the initiative and trying (maybe only superficially tho) to establish a dialog. It certainly is a good strategic move.
The results have yet to be seen. As they say, the proof of the pudding is in the tasting. I hope they are very successful, a clever idea. Anything to streamline the process is good. |
|
Comment
4 of 8 |
November 7, 2007
CONTINUED FROM LAST POST..
Recreational fishing and diving could be similarly affected. Cumulative impacts to visual resources could occur if more than one wind facility were sited in close proximity (i.e., multiple facilities within visual range). The potential for cumulative impacts to these resources would require particular attention when planning and siting new alternative energy facilities. |
|
Comment
5 of 8 |
November 7, 2007
Continued from last post....
The potential for impacts to marine mammals from construction and operational noise, marine vessel strikes, entanglement in moorings at wave energy facilities, and collisions with marine current turbines would increase as more facilities are sited and more activities are ongoing in a single region. This is also true for fish, sea turtles, marine and coastal birds, and some terrestrial birds and bats migrating over the OCS (bird impacts would be mainly associated with wind facilities). Cumulative impacts to commercial fisheries could be of concern if several large exclusion areas were established close to one another. Also, increased fishing and shipping pressure may occur in areas outside of alternative energy facilities due to displacement of the activities from within exclusion areas. CONTINUED TO NEXT POST |
|
Comment
6 of 8 |
November 7, 2007
After the disaster and the black eye that the unregulated Cape Wind project has caused for the wind industry, it is refreshing to see that Hawaii will be done properly.
It is also important to note the new Outer Continental Shelf rules that MMS released yesterday. I have attached a breif summary below. Anyone familiar with the Cape Wind offshore project will recognize immediately that the 24 square mile project is in direct conflict of almost every issue raised by MMS. SEE BELOW Potential cumulative impacts from routine activities at alternative energy facilities could be most significant for marine mammals, marine and coastal birds, commercial fisheries, fish resources and EFH, sea turtles, coastal and seafloor habitats, and visual resources. CONTINUED TO NEXT POST |
|
Comment
7 of 8 |
November 8, 2007
Cape Wind poses a threat to endangered birds and mammals present in Nantucket Sound.
David Cottingham, Executive Director of the Marine Mammal Commission, a federal agency established under the Marine Mammal Protection Act: "There is little doubt that activities associated with the proposed action, particularly the use of pile drivers for tower construction will result in the taking of marine mammals by harassment." Mass Audubon's comments on the Cape Wind Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) of February 23, 2005 to the US Army Corps of Engineers: "By utilizing other bird mortality data provided in the DEIS, Mass Audubon staff scientists arrived at avian mortalities that ranged from 2,300 to 6,600 collision deaths per year." |
|
Comment
8 of 8 |
November 8, 2007
Cape Wind presents multiple conflicts in Nantucket Sound by new MMS OCS rules, thank you, Mr. Carroll.
MA FISHERMEN'S PARTNERSHIP: A Coalition of 18 Massachusetts commercial fishing organizations, representing more than 3,000 fishermen, calls on Cape Wind to "stop making false claims" about their offshore wind project's impact on fishing. "Mass. Fishermen's Partnership says "Cape Wind puts fishermen at risk" MA Audubon: "This area of Nantucket Sound is within the eastern U.S. migratory bird flyway and hosts high concentrations of wintering waterfowl, and is in close proximity to nesting, foraging and staging areas for federally endangered roseate terns and threatened piping plovers. Substantial numbers of federally endangered sea turtles and protected marine mammal species frequent the proposed project site. In addition, the proposed site provides habitat for federally regulated finfish and shellfish populations." |
Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions.
If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!
Previous Article
1 of 8
The idea of opening up dialog may solve that problem and get things moving toward sustainable power. We cannot forever depend upon oil for thermal electric production.
Art, I may be classified a Luddite (half-witted Leicestershire union workman who destroyed laborsaving machinery as a protest) but I think the majority here are not in that category. They do want clean energy.
adrianakau2aol.com