Climate Change Consensus Doesn’t Yet Exist
We appreciate that, in the July 1999 issue, Environment Hawai`i brought the challenge of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change to the attention of its readers. We believe that the Hawai`i Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) is a valuable first step in identifying the challenges in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and recommending numerous ways to reduce those emissions. Please allow me to address several points in your review of the CCAP:
First, the state took the initiative to develop the CCAP as the first step toward a comprehensive plan. As stated in the plan, “This is Hawai`i’s first iteration of a Climate Change Action Plan. It does not set specific goals. It is intended as a catalyst for discussions by Hawai`i’s people about their involvement in future efforts to reduce emissions and to adapt to climate change. The major recommendation of this first plan is to develop consensus as to Hawai`i’s goals for greenhouse gas emissions.”
While Environment Hawai`i may assume such a consensus exists, we believe it does not, especially in the absence of a ratified Kyoto protocol. It must be built from the grass roots up.
Second, the article’s concern about “omitted emissions” is misplaced in the context of the CCAP, which responded to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidance. As stated in the CCAP, the omission of fuel used for international flights and for ships involved in overseas operations was consistent with the inventory criteria established by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Military use was included in terms of electrical generation sold to military installations and fixed fossil fuel use. Lack of data on actual mobile use of fuel in Hawai`i made it impossible to accurately capture that component. The use of the fuel sold to the military did not necessarily occur in Hawai`i. The quantities of both overseas fuel and fuel sold to the military for mobile uses and their emissions were reported in Chapter 3.
Third, the article does not recognize the collaboration and cooperation of Hawai`i’s utilities and energy companies in developing the CCAP. They provided valuable data without which the CCAP could not have been fully developed. In addition, many are taking action to reduce emissions; for example, Hawaiian Electric Company is a participant in the USDPA’s Climate Challenge Program, is working to make O`ahu an electric vehicle-ready city, etc. The HECO utilities have developed the “Sunpower for Schools” program, and all of Hawai`i’s electric utilities seek to reduce electricity demand and generation fuel use through demand-side management programs. The article does cite independent power producer AES Hawai`i’s carbon offset program. Additionally, we are investigating carbon offset forestry as an option for Hawai`i.
Finally, the Environment Hawai`i article claims that what the CCAP “does not disclose, or even mention, are the long-term consequences — including economic impacts — that could occur if carbon emissions are not curtailed.” Section 2.3, “Potential Effects of Global Climate Change on Hawai`i,” provides six pages of detail on the consequences based upon the USEPA pamphlet, “Climate Change and Hawai`i.” It was another fundamental recommendation of the CCAP that “further work is needed to identify future effects of climate change on Hawai`i’s people, environment, ecosystems, and economy in order to identify changes to which the state must adapt.”
Please be assured that we will continue to seek to identify ways of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to deal with the problem of climate change. The CCAP may be reviewed in the public libraries and on the Internet at http://www.state.hi.us/dbedt/ert/ccap/ccap-toc.html.
Maurice H. Kaya
Energy, Resources and Technology
Program Administrator, Energy Division
Hawai`i Department of Business,
Economic Development, and Tourism
Editor’s note: While the CCAP does contain, as Kaya notes, “six pages of detail” on the consequences of inaction — in a volume of some 500 pages — these were not considered in the calculation of the costs of dealing with climate change.
Volume 10, Number 3 September 1999
Leave a Reply