Vj^Qsu—Qi^^ 1 - IBM HTTP Server 8.5 - Hawaii.gov

Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc^.- PO Box 2750 . Honolulu, HI 96840-0001 nc^

S\/CL-

K H

October 30, 2007 William A Bonnet Vice President Government & Community Affairs

The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission

Kekuanaoa Building 465 South King Street, 1st Floor Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

Dear Commissioners:

Siibject: Docket No. 2007-0084 HECO Integrated Resource Planning (HECO IRP-4)

In accordance with Order No. 23312, filed March 21, 2007, attached is the information from HECO's Climate change and Global Warming technical session that was held on June 8, 2007. This filing contains the following attachments: 1) Advertisement of the technical session, 2) Summary of the technical session, 3) Handouts from the technical session, 4) PowerPoint presentations by the speakers, 5) Written comments received from the public, 6) Transcript of the technical session, 7) "Olelo broadcast schedule of the technical session, and 8) DVD copy of the technical session. Due to the voluminous nature of the attachments, HECO is providing one complete set to the Commission, Consumer Advocate and Life of the Land. In addition, HECO will make available for public review a complete set of the attachments at its IRP Division offices, 820 Ward Avenue, 4" floor. Interested parties should contact Gary Hashiro, Director, Integrated Resource Planning, at 543-7767 to arrange for document review.

Sincerely,

Vj^Qsu—Qi^^ 1 cz

oca O l

Attachments

cc: Division of Consumer Advocacy H. Curtis

^n —, c n ~ -

C~3

o

-q

- "D

Attachment 1

Advertisement of the technical session

#

Public Meeting on Climate Change & Global Warming

June 8, 2007 Hawaii State Capitol Audi tor ium

You are invited to attend a public meeting on climate change and global warming. The 2007 State Legislature has passed a bill that would mandate reducing levels of climate changing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels. As part of Hawaiian Electric Company's Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) process, this public meeting seeks to identify options for how Hawaii can respond to this requirement.

8:30 - 8:45 Opening Remarks

8:45 - 10:15 Background on Climate Change Issues • An Overview of the Greenhouse Gas Issue • Hawaii's Greenhouse Gas Inventory • Impact to Hawaii's Shorelines

10 :30 - 12:00 Policy Impl icat ions for Hawaii Environmental, Utility, Legislative, and Economic Perspectives

1:00 - 2:45 Options and Strategies for Control l ing Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Renewable Energy Energy Efftciency What Each of Us Can Do From Belief to Behavior; Motivating Change Feedstock for the Future

3:00- 4:30 Incorporat ing Climate Change into the IRP Process • How Does the Regulatory Process Work

with Greenhouse Gas? • How Does the State Government Play a Role? • What Kinds of Things can Utilities be Doing?

Panelists will include representatives from the Hawaii Legislature, the State Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism, University of Hawaii, Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, environmental organizations, the renewable energy industry, and other expwrts.

All interested members of the public are welcome to attend this free meeting. Brown tag lunches are recommended.

To benefit our fragile Island ecosystem, Hawai away 100 native Hawaiian trees to attend

For more information, contact [email protected]

Hawaiian Electric Compa

mailto:[email protected]

Attachment 2

Summary of the technical session

Summary of the Climate Change and Global Warming Technical Session

HECO recognizes the importance of Climate Change and Global Warming, and in accordance with Order No. 23312\ filed March 21, 2007, Docket No. 03-0253, HECO conducted a Climate change and Global Warming technical session in HECO's IRP-4 planning process to address this issue.

The intent of the technical session was to help stakeholders learn more about climate change and global warming from the experts, to hear the concerns from the public, and to encourage suggestions from the public and experts regarding how HECO should address this issue in its IRP plans.

The format of this technical session was developed with input from Henry Curtis (Executive Director of Life of the Land) and from the HECO IRP Advisory Group membership in general. Fifteen speakers with a broad range of expertise provided a balanced discussion of the issues. The four topics were as follows: 1) Background on Climate Change Issues, 2) Policy Implications for Hawaii, 3) Options and Strategies for Controlling GHG Emissions,

^ On March 7, 2007, HECO, the Consumer Advocate and Life of the Land filed a Stipulation Regarding Hearing and Commission Approval. The parties' agreed-upon terms to govem the disposition of HECO's IRP-3 and the agreed-upon procedures to govem the development of HECO's IRP-4 were approved by Order No. 23312. With respect to the issue of Climate Change, provision number 10 of the stipulation stated:

10. HECO, the Consumer Advocate, and LOL agree that the issue of Climate Change requires attention throughout the IRP-4 process. In order to facilitate this, HEcO will conduct (as part of its IRP-4 process) a technical session with a panel discussion on climate change and global warming, and will perform a scenario analysis (or analyses) to analyze potential future requirements or utility costs arising out of measures that may be adopted to address climate change/global warming. The intent of the panel discussion is for HECO and the Advisory Group members to get a better understanding of the issues relating to global warming and how it should be considered in the IRP process. The Advisory Group members will have the opportunity to provide experts for this panel discussion and will be allowed to participate in a question and answer forum. HECO will include a copy of this panel presentation and discussions with its IRP-4 Plan filing, so that the information will become part of the record in the IRP-4 Docket opened by the Commission. (In order to include a copy of the panel discussion with the IRP-4 Plan filing, a transcript of this panel discussion will be prepared.) The Advisory Group also will have the opportunity to provide input to HECO regarding the climate change/global warming altemative scenario analysis (or analyses), and any climate change/global warming altemative resource plan considered in the lRP-4 process.

and 4) Incorporating Climate Change into the IRP Process. At least a 30-minute question and answer session was provided for each topic area for the public to ask their questions or state their concems.

'Olelo videotaped the session and a DVD copy is included as Attachment 3. HECO has also provided copies of the DVD to interested parties, including Legislators, State government officials and HECO IRP Advisory Group members, in addition to making copies available to both HELCO and MECO's IRP Advisory Groups.

In keeping with the theme of the technical session, 100 native Hawaiian trees were given to the audience and speakers. The trees were donated by HECO and grown at the Hui Ku Maoli Ola Native Hawaiian Plant Specialists in Waimanalo.

Advertisement of the Climate Change and Global Warming technical session was run in the following:

a. Honolulu Advertiser on June 3, 2007 b. Honolulu Star Bulletin on June 3, 2007 c. Pacific Business News on June 1, 2007 d. Honolulu Weekly on May 30, 2 007 e. HECO's website at www.hecoirp.com f. In HECO's Advisory Group meetings with a request to

each member to invite anyone whom they feel would be interested in this session

The information provided at the technical session is being filed to make this information a part of the record in the IRP-4 Docket. Furthermore, this information will facilitate future IRP Advisory Group discussion on developing climate changes/global warming alternative scenario analyses and altemative resource plans for consideration in the IRP-4 process.

http://www.hecoirp.com

Attachment 3

Handouts from the technical session

Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. Integrated Resource Planning Advisory Group Technical Session

Climate Change/Global Warming June 8, 2007 - State Capitol Auditorium

8:30 - 8:45 Opening Remarks • Moderator: Dr. Mike Hamnett, Research Corporation of UH

8:45 - 10:15 B a c k g r o u n d on C l i m a t e C h a n g e Issues • An Overview ofthe Greenhouse Gas Issue- Dr. Terry Surles, Hawaii Natural Energy Institute (30

minutes) • Hawaii's Greenhouse Gas Inventory- Dr. John Tantlinger, State ofHawaii, Dept. of Business,

Economic Deveiopment and Tourism (15 minutes) • Impact to Hawaii's Shorelines - Dr. Chip Fletcher, UH Dept of Geology and Geophysics

(15 minutes) • Q&A (30 minutes)

10:15-10:30 B r e a k

1 0 : 3 0 - 12:00 Policy Impl ica t ions for H a w a i i (15 minutes each speaker) • An Environmental Perspective - Mr. Henry Curtis, Life ofthe Land • A Utility Perspective - Mr. Robbie Aim, Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. • A Legislative Perspective - Representative Hermina Morita, Chair ofthe House Committee on

Energy and Environmental Protection • An Economic Perspective -Dr. Jim Roumasset, UH Dept. of Economics & UHERO • Q&A (30 minutes)

1 2 : 0 0 - 1 : 0 0 B r e a k • Film Presentation, "Washed Away", Capitol Room No. 016

1:00- 2:45 O p t i o n s a n d S t ra teg ies for C o n t r o l l i n g G H G Emiss ions (15 minutes each speaker)

Renewable Energy - Dr. Dave Rezachek, Hawaii Renewable Energy Association Energy Efficiency - Mr. Brian Kealoha, Energy Industries What Each of Us Can D o - Ms. Shanah Trevenna, Sustainable Saunders From Belief to Behavior: Motivating Change - Mr. Jeff Mikulina, Sierra Club Feedstock for the Future - Dr. Barry Raleigh, UH Q&A (30 Minutes)

2 : 4 5 - 3 : 0 0 B r e a k

3:00- 4:30- I n c o r p o r a t i n g C l i m a t e C h a n g e in to the I R P Process (15 minutes each speaker) • How Does the Regulatory Process Work with Greenhouse Gas? - Mr. Carl Freedman,

Haiku Design and Analysis • How Does the State Govemment Play a Role? - Dr. John Tantlinger, DBEDT • What Kinds of Things Can Utilities be Doing? - Mr. Danen Kimura, Energy Industries • Q&A (30 minutes)


Biographies and Synopsis of Lunch Time Film

Moderator

Michael P. Hamnett, PhD, is Executive Director of the Research Corporation ofthe University ofHawaii. He served as Director ofthe Social Science Research Institute at the University ofHawaii from 1996 until 2004, a Researcher in SSRI from 1986-1996, and as Deputy Director and Research Coordinator ofthe Pacific Islands Development Program at East-West Center from 1980-1986. He has 30 years of policy research, technical assistance, and training experience in the Pacific Islands region. He has organized and managed over 40 major public policy development, policy research, technical assistance and planning projects for Pacific Island govemments, the State ofHawaii, and US govemment agencies. These projects have focused on energy, climate variability and change, application of climate information to decision-making, coastal resource and environmental management, disaster preparedness and mitigation, and other public policy problems. Dr. Hamnett has served as Principal Investigator ofthe Hawaii Coral Reef Initiative Research Program since it was established in 1998; chair ofthe Statewide Hazard Mitigation Forum since it was established 1998; and co-chair ofthe Hawaii Energy Policy Forum since it was established in 2003. He was also team leader for the Hawaii Coastal Hazard Mitigation Projects (I992-I993 and 1994-1996); co-Principal Investigator for the Pacific ENSO (El Nino Southern Oscillation) Application Center from 1994 to 2000; Principal Investigator on projects to assess the impact of climate variability on water resource management, health, fisheries, and disaster management in the Pacific Islands and served as General Secretary ofthe All Islands Coral Reef Coordinating Committee from 1994 until 2003.

Dr. Hamnett has authored or co-authored seven books, monographs and collected volumes, thirty-five policy and technical reports, and numerous articles and book chapters. His authored Natural Disaster Mitigation in Pacific Island Countries: A Policy Guide for Planners and Decision-Makers published by the UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs, and co-authored and edited Global Trends and the Future ofthe Pacific Islands published by the Asia Foundation's Center for Asia and Pacific Affairs.

Panel Session: Background on Climate Change Issues Dr. Terry Surles has been working in the area of climate change research and technology development since 1981. He is currently a Researcher at the University of Hawaii's Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, evaluating the opportunities for and impacts due to increased renewable energy systems on electricity grids. He is also leading an effort examining the potential economic impact related to the reduction of petroleum use on the state ofHawaii. He is also a consultant to the University of Caiifomia President's Office coordinating new regional carbon capture and storage efforts.

Prior to these activities. Dr. Surles was Vice President at the Electric Power Research Institute for Environment and at the Electricity Innovations Institute. For several years prior to EPRI, he was at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. He was Associate Laboratory Director for Energy Programs and then on loan to the Caiifomia Energy Commission as Director ofthe Public Interest Energy Research program. Dr. Suries came to Caiifomia as the Deputy Secretary for Environmental Research and Technology at Cal/EPA in 1997. Dr. Suries was at Argonne National Laboratory for many years prior to moving to Caiifomia and held a variety of positions, with the last being General Manager for Environmental programs.

He has a Ph.D. in chemistry from Michigan State University. He has numerous publications, technical reports, and presentations to his credit.



Dr. John Tantlinger, Manager, Energy Planning & Policy Branch, Strategic Industries Division, State ofHawaii Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism, has 25 years experience in strategic planning and policy development in the State of Hawaii in the public and private sectors. He has served for nearly 20 years in the Slate of Hawaii Strategic Industries Division. He manages the Division's Energy Planning & Policy Branch, which is responsible for energy planning and policy development; energy emergency preparedness; energy data analysis and computer modeling; and, advancement of advanced energy technologies for the State ofHawaii. He manages the Hawaii Energy Strategy Program involving Hawaii's energy industry, key stakeholder groups, and all levels of govemment. Since 1988, he has managed the State Energy Emergency Preparedness Program coordinating with industry and govemment to address issues of energy security and disaster response, including Homeland Security protection of critical energy infrastructure. He serves as Vice Chair ofthe Hawaii State Energy Council, the Slate's mechanism to coordinate energy emergency preparedness. The Council includes Hawaii's major energy companies -electricity and gas utilities, oil refiners, critical friel storers and distributors - specialized military units, and relevant agencies from all levels of govemment.

In 2002/2003, he led the project team of Stillwater Associates, National Conference of State Legislatures, and U.S. Federal Trade Commission, which conducted a comprehensive analysis of Hawaii's pefroleum industry and fuel markets, and produced DBEDT's report to the 2004 Legislature.

Dr. Tantlinger has published and presented numerous invited papers on U.S. and intemational energy plaiming and policy. He is Vice Chair ofthe Energy Security & Data Committee ofthe National Association of State Energy Officials. He is a retired U.S. Army officer (Infantry) who rose from the ranks. Dr. Tantlinger has traveled extensively, living in Japan for 5 years. He has a B.S. in Business & Management (Summa Cum Laude), University of Maryland, M.S. in Administration, Central Michigan University, Doctorate in Administration of Higher Education, University of Southern Caiifomia.

Dr. Charles (Chip) Fletcher has a Ph.D. in Geology at University of Delaware concentrating in coastal sedimentology and Pleistocene-Holocene sea-level change. He currently is Professor and Department Chairperson of Geology and Geophysics in the School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST) at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu. Fletcher teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in Physical Geology and Coastal Geology. He also conducts research in remote sensing and coastal hazards. Dr. Fletcher's work is published in over 50 peer-reviewed, intemational scientific joumal articles and 20 books and reports. He heads the Coastal Geology Group at the University ofHawaii and has been principal advisor in the awarding of 18 graduate degrees (5 Ph.D. and 18 M.S.). Dr. Fletcher's research grants and contracts total $5M since 1992.

He is recipient of awards for teaching and in recognition of community service and research excellence. For his work in service to govemment agencies and local groups. Professor Fletcher was the 2001 recipient ofthe Robert W. Clapton Award for Outstanding Service to the Community awarded by the University of Hawaii, Board of Regents.; and 2006 recipient ofthe Hung Wo and Elizabeth Lau Ching Foundation Award for Faculty Service to the Community. In recognition of his professional accomplishments, he was elected Fellow ofthe Geological Society of America and in 2004 was identified by UH Manoa Chancellor's Office as a "Leading Researcher at UHM". Fletcher has served as past member ofthe UH-Manoa Faculty Senate and the Kailua Neighborhood Board where he resides with his wife and 3 school-age children.



Panel Session: Policy Implications for Hawaii Henry Curris, Life ofthe Land, Executive Director, attended Queens College, City University of New York and has a B.A. in Theoretical (Mathematical) Economics, and completed his graduate course work but not his masters thesis for his M.A. in Theoretical Economics (graduate thesis focused on macroeconomic agricultural policy). Henry pursued his graduate research in Caiifomia, studying the intemational grain trade and agricultural commodity market fiitures. Henry became involved with the Caiifomia environmental movement, focusing chiefly on unsustainable agricultural policies. He moved to Hawaii in 1991, joined the Life of the Land Board in 1994, and became the Executive Director in early 1995. The major issues he focused on were land use and toxics. He served on military Restoration Advisory Boards (RAB) and Technical Review Committees for the Army, Navy and Air Force, serving as co-chair ofthe Hickam AFB RAB for 9 years. Henry has studied energy issues over the past 10 years, including the rise ofthe ethanol controversy, investigating all sides ofthe issue.

Robbie Aim, Hawaiian Electric Company, Senior Vice President Public Affairs. Bom and raised in Hawaii. Attended University of Iowa School of Law (Juris Doctor w/ Distinction), University ofHawaii (BA in Political Science), and University High School. Current community affairs include: Bishop Museum (Board of Directors), Boys and Giris Club ofHawaii (Board of Advisors), Community Links Hawaii (Board of Directors), Hawaii Nature Center (Board of Directors), Hawaii Public Television Foundation (Treasurer, Board of Directors), and Helping Hands Hawaii (Chair, Board of Directors).

Representarive Hermina Morita, Chair ofthe House Committee on Energy and Environmental Protection, member ofthe following committees: Consumer Protection & Commerce, Judiciary, Water, Land, Ocean Resources & Hawaiian Affairs. Attended George Washington University, University ofHawaii, and Kamehameha Schools. In 1997 she was awarded the prestigious Arthur S. Flemming Fellowship given to emerging political leaders in the country. She was the second legislator in Hawaii to receive this nationally recognized award.In June 2002 she received an honorable mention as a finalist for the Good Housekeeping Award for Women in Govemment. Representative Morita was awarded "Hawaii Legislator ofthe Year-2002" by the Sierra Club Hawaii State Chapter and "President's Award" by the Hawaii Audubon Society. In Fall 2002 she served as "Legislator in Residence" within the College of Social Science, University ofHawaii, Manoa. In 2003, Representafive Morita received a fellowship from the Eleanor Roosevelt Global Leadership Institute as one of twelve State Legislators selected nationally for a study tour of China focused on environmental, energy and trade issues and the EPA's 2003 Outstanding Environmental Achievement Award.

Rep. Morita also serves as a Board member for the following organizations: Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, Legacy Foundation ofthe Pacific, Environment Hawaii, and Wai Ola. She also serves on the Advisory Board and as a volunteer for Kauai's Childem's Discovery Museum.

Dr. Jim Roumasset is a Professor of Economics at the University ofHawaii, Manoa, specializing in public policy analysis, and director of UHERO's research program in Environmental Economics and Sustainable Resource Management. He has published widely on sustainable development, efficient resource use, energy modeling, and the optimal control of global warming. He currently serves on the Chancellor's Sustainability Council and the UHM Climate Commission. He is currently pursuing several initiatives in transdisciplinary sustainability science through a cooperative agreement between UHM and research institutions in SE Asia.

Lunch Break Film Presentation: "Washed Away" "Washed Away" is a documentary from the National Film Board of Canada that examines how residents of Shishmaref, Alaska and Tuvalu in the South Pacific stniggle to cope with the disappearance ofthe land where they have lived for centun'es.



Panel Session: Options and Strategies for Controlling GHG Emissions Dr. Dave Rezachek, is the associate development director for, and a fiill-time consultant to, Honolulu Seawater Air Conditioning, LLC.

Dr. Rezachek has more than 30 years of experience in energy and environmental systems research, design, demonstration, analysis and engineering and project management. He has been a registered professional mechanical engineer in the State ofHawaii for more than 21 years.

He has been a project manager for dozens of projects in the areas of renewable and conventional energy, energy efficiency and conservation, electric and hybrid vehicles, altemative fijels, energy and engineering education and environmental engineering. Many ofthese projects involved research, development, demonstration and commercialization ofnew and relatively untested technologies, systems and concepts. He has a B.S. in chemistry from the University of Minnesota, a B.S. in environmental technology and urban systems from Florida Intemational University, an M.S. in mechanical engineering from the University ofHawaii and a Ph.D. in ocean engineering from the University ofHawaii.

He is the owner of, and principal consultant for, Rezachek & Associates, an intemational energy and envirorm^ental engineering consulting group with its base of operations located in Hawaii.

Brian Kealoha has been active in energy efficiency and renewable energy since 1994. He is currently the Senior Vice President of Sales and Business Development for Energy Industries, a Hawaii based energy services company with offices throughout the U.S. and Asia. He has assisted thousands of businesses decrease their energy consumption and expenditures while reducing their carbon footprint. Mr. Kealoha is a Certified Energy Manager, Certified Lighting Efficiency Professional, and Certified Demand Side Manager. He has spoken at national conferences for the Department of Energy, Rebuild America, and was a lecturer in Maui Community College's Sustainable Technologies Program for several years. Prior to joining Energy Industries, Mr. Kealoha developed and supervised energy efficiency programs for Pacific Gas & Electric in Caiifomia and Avista Utilities in Washington. He was also employed by Maui Electric Company and served as project manager on a munber of projects ranging from the first utility owned combined heat and power unit in Hawaii to the first net energy metered photovoltaic system in Hawaii. Mr. Kealoha was recently honored by Pacific Business News as part of its Top Forty Under 40 leadership award for 2007. Mr. Kealoha holds a BBA in Marketing and Economics as well as a Masters in Business Administration from Gonzaga University.

Shanab Trevenna has worked as a Mechanical Engineer in Canada v/ith corporations such as IBM and Philips. Specializing in metering and process stream lining she has always had a passion for technology and efficiency. Concemed with the rise of global warming she tumed her skills to sustainability focusing on transforming ideas into tangible action. As a student at UHM pursing her PhD in Political Science specializing in Altemative Futures, Shanah now leads a devoted student sustainability group called the HUB standing for 'Help Us Bridge'. Their first project, Sustainable Saunders, will evolve a seven-story building housing the social sciences into a testing bed for solutions, serving as an inspirational model for the campus and beyond!

Jeffrey Mikulina is the Director of the Sierra Club, Hawai" i Chapter. He serves as the lobbyist for the organization and oversees the activities ofthe four Sierra Club groups in Hawai'i that have a combined membership of over 5,500. He retumed to Hawai" i after graduate study through a National Science Foundation Fellowship in engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He has served as the Vice Chair of both the Honolulu Planning Commission and the Honolulu Charter Commission. Some of his accomplishments with the Sierra Club include passing legislation that requires returnable deposits on all beverage containers, increases the funding of natural resources through tourism taxes, and increases renewable energy use in the state.



Dr. C. Barry Raleigh, got a Phd from UCLA and went to join the Research School of Physical Sciences at the Australian National University in 1963. He became a research Geophysicist in the USGS' Earthquake Research Program in Menlo Park, CA in 1966 where he and others demonstrated in 1967 that the Denver earthquakes were caused by injection of pressurized toxic waste at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal. Later Raleigh conducted an active earthquake control experiment at the Rangely Oil Field in westem Colorado in which he tumed earthquakes on and off by controlling the fluid pressure in the oil reservoir.

In 1982, Raleigh became Director of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory where he started the Climate Research Center and initiated the Continental Drilling Program and the Greenland Ice Cap drilling program. He gave his first lecture on global warming in 1981.

Raleigh became the first Dean ofthe UH's School of Ocean, Earth Science and Technology in 1989. He is now a Researcher in the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute and President of HR Biopetroleum, Inc.

Panel Session: Incorporating Climate Change into the IRP Process Carl Freedman is the principal of Haiku Design & Analysis, a Maui consulting firm specializing in public utility regulatory affairs. Integrated Resource Planning (HIP) and economic analysis. Carl has been an active participant in Hawaii's energy utility IRP process since its inception. Carl was one ofthe stakeholders in the collaborative process that defined the principle characteristics of IRP in Hawaii in the PUC docket that established the existing IRP Framework. On behalf of the Hawaii Consumer Advocate, Carl reviewed and testified before the PUC regarding the first IRP's filed by each of Hawaii's energy utilities. Carl is now under contract with the Maui County Department of Water Supply to provide the technical and economic analyses for the IRP components ofthe Maui County Water Use and Development Plan. Carl is the Chair ofthe Regulatory Reform Work Group ofthe Hawaii Energy Policy Fomm.

Dr. John Tantlinger, (see above)

Darren Kimura is the Founder and Chairman ofthe Board of Energy Industries Holdings, Inc. Energy Industries Holdings is comprised ofa number of companies including Energy Industries a national energy services company, Sopogy a renewable energy technology company and 7 other energy companies. Mr. Kimura is a recognized expert in energy conservation and renewable energy systems and has been a speaker on global warming for the Department of Energy, and The Guam Energy Office. He is the President elect for the nation's largest energy association PLASMA, a co-chairperson for the Hawaii Energy Policy Foram and on the advisory group for Hawaiian Electric's Integrated Resource Plan. He is also a certified sustainable development professional.

For more information on Hawaiian Electric's Integrated Resource Planning, please go to w^'\v.hecoirTJ.com or contact us at irp(5jheco.com with your questions or comments.

Thank you!

http://hecoirTJ.com

Attachment 4

PowerPoint presentations by the speakers

Climate Change - A Primer on Energy and the Environment

Or: See you real soon, I'm off to the Thirty Years War

Terry Surles

• ^ Hawaii Natural Entrgy ln«timt»

IPCC Bottom Line on Climate Change

Warming ofthe climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global mean sea level.

• ^ Hawaii Natural Encfgy I n i t l t u f

Public-Private Partnerships Needed For Solving Critical Issues Facing Our Energy System

.* • '4 ;> , • " ] 1 ^ • •* i^*.-"'! I> • '< >",•

Grid Modamization 31obal Cilmats Change Energy Security EnvtronmenI Quality

These Issues Cannot Be Resolved Without Partnerships - The FRAM Oil Filter Commercial - "Pay me now... or pay me later"

• ^ Hawaii Natural EntrgY l"«lltul«

Main Points

Ovei^iew of greenhouse gas effect - the basic science

Recent IPCC and other scientific findings versus some Flat Earth Society folk - 2007 report - Projections for the future for the future

Many options are available to manage the GHG problem - Both technical and institutional opportunities - There is no silver bullet and none of them will be easy

We need to address this problem seriously now - Hawaii can be a leader!!

P ^ Hawaii Nalural Enaf^y I re t l t u f

Some History

1800s to 2005

• ^ Hawaii Natural Energy Instltut*

i i l

The Greenhouse Effect Was Quantified in 1861 The solar heat possesses... the power of crossing an atmosphere; but, when the heat is absorbed by the planet, it is so changed in quaiity that the rays emanating from the planet cannot get with the same freedom back into space. Thus the atmosphere admits ofthe entrance ofthe solar heat, but checks its exit; and the result is a tendency to accumulate heat at the surface ofthe planet."

John Tyndall

• ^ Hawaii Natural Enargy I r e t l l u f

The Earth is a Greenhouse Planet

Mars Earth (0.03% CO,) Venus (96% CO,)

-es^c IS^C Average Surface Temperatures

452°C

The combination of solar irradiance and greenhouse effect determines the mean surface temperatures of Mars, Earth and Venus. In the absence of the natural greenhouse effect, the average surface temperature of Earth wfould be -IQ^C.

• 4 Hawaii Natural Enargy Imtltuta

Source: CT. Bowman, Mechanical Engineering, Stanlonj

Earliest Predictions of Global Warming Due to Burning of Fossil Fuels Were in 1800s

• Hogboom (1880s) calculated emissions from anthropogenic sources and said that human activity was adding as much CO2 to the atmosphere as natural processes

• Svante Arrhenius (-1900) - Gradual accumulation over centuries could double atmospheric CO2 concentrations

• Additional concems in the 1930s (Callendar) and 1950s (Roger Revelle)

• ^ HawaU Natural Enargy Instibtta

iii

MAUNA LOA OBSERVATORY, HAWAII UONIHlY AVCRACE CARBON DIOXIDE CONCENT^AIION

3 9 0 ^T | - | i |-| | r p - n T r | T y , T ; | n i T T T r p p | T i T p | ' T n T T i M n " ' " ' ; : i ' T i p T r r t [ T r r r r r

385 i

MLO-145 T T I ' P T ' T n T T i T ' r V ' T H

Charles David Keeling

315 i V ^ i / V V . " '

4:

Keeling and Whorf (2005) J I O R I I I I I I I ' I 11 ! ' I I I I I I H I I 1 I I I • i 1 11 I 1 I • 1 I ' I I • I I 111 J I I I I I • i ' I I I 1.1 I 11 I I i • I L I I I .. I I I I I I I . I 11 I I I I r I , I I, I i "

H I

1958 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 Y C A R rs-k..,-Di

Human and Natural Drivers of Climate Change

'??^-!is^;- 'Ba.*ia'%'^"" u--.' -.^^-"'^ • f ' ' ' ' . •'••'.••"> t-->,>-

GOgGjHKand^ ^

(Note'that-.watervapdr is.a'GHG)-.;'

• ^ Hawan Natural Enargy Iwl l tula sooo T i m * ( b * < o r * aooS)

Various Modeling Results for Historical Temperatures: The Infamous Inhofe/Barton/Crichton "Hockey Stick"

rr 0.5 -

I ^ -0.5

, p r , , , . . r , . r 1 , . . -Mann al al, 1960. raoonelruclJon (annual maan, lull hemlcphar*) Mann a[ al, 1900, roconi I ruction (annual mean. 30N-70N lallluda band) Jonaa al al, 1996, raconstmctton (summer, axtrairoplcal amphaaia) Brttta. 2000, raconatructlon (traa-ring donstry only, summsr, axlr«tmp4cal) Instrumanlal data (ar^nual rnaan, full hamisphara)

• ^ Hawaii Natural Energy Irwtltuta

The Uncertainty Is Whether the Future Will Be Bad or Worse

O i l l l C*iHI^HOMI*Ditat

GCM results for California go from relatively dry to extremely wet conditions

i»» •*• IM lilt i«4> nk ca> ttt* K * rtta'

m Hawaii Natural Enargy ln«tltuti

Most Recent Information/Analysis

2007 Inter-govemmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - established in the early 1990s

Considerable amount of intemational infrastructure established following Rio Summit in 1992 - with support of Bush 1

• • Hawaii Natural Enargyl iul i tu

Drivers of Climate Change: It's Getting Worse

Annual fossil COj emissions increased from an average of 6.4 GtC per year in the 1990s, to 7.2 GtC per year in 2000-2005 COj radiative forcing increased by 20% from 1995 to 2005, the largest in any decade in at least the last 200 years (since the start ofthe Industrial Era)

• • htiwall Natural Enorgy Inatltut*

Global mean tempepatares.are risinatasierv/i ih itme Warmest T 2 years: years;

1998,2005,2003,2002,2004,2006, 2001.1997.1995,1999,1990,2000

Global-average radiative forcing estimates and ranges

Radiative Forcing Componen ts R F valuea [ W m ^ Spat ial acala

Long-kvad Br«annouaa g a t a a '

Rlramophor ia wa ta r vapour Trom C H ,

S u r t a c * al twOo

Ctoud BlbMo •naot

Lfriear conba l la

SlmlDaphartc

1 . e S [ l . A 9 l o 1.83]

0.4A [0.43 lo O.UJ 0 ,1«10 M i f O If)]

^ ) .0S [-0.19 10 0.051

O J S [O 25 IO 0 B9|

0J }7 [0.02 U J O 121

•o.ii.a.A loo.oj

0.1 10.0 10 0 2]

-O.BI -D.SI I l -3 .11

- 0 . 7 I - t . B t [ ) - 0 . 3 |

0.01 ( 0 . 0 O 3 t o 0 03 |

ConOnvntBl U g M u )

Cond nantmJ la global

n global

H \ ^

Mad - U M

Solar i i racl lanca o.i2[aoeioo.30)

Total nal an l h ropu^M i l c

1 . B [ 0 . 8 l u 2 . 4 |

-2 -1 0 1 RadlativB Forcing (W m'^)

Attribution

• are observed changes consistent with

Hexpected responses to forcings

^inconsistent with altemative explanations

P ^ Hawaii Natural Enargy Inatltuta

-o.s ' All forcing

- I D J - i -UCUhu 1

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 Year

- O i ;

- I D l 1900 1920 1940 I960 l9EtO 2000

Yeni

Observed widespread warming tjnutt h t M t m n o i v a

Global ocean

I 1955 ^ , ^ , , , 1980 2005

;;^;^^^Ja2S;rv/tJod^,:^ •: A- .. v„

rrMveiwyinlikelv'due to.khown .'.i-v--- ••fTv.natural causes.alone . *.-:' - - '" / rv:natural causes.alone. , . . ,

L ^ t . , ^ - , ' . - ' ; . i , ' ^ , ' . . - ^ •-•••- . - . • ]. - iJa 18

A Paleoclimatic Perspective

Paleoclimate information supports the interpretation that the warmth ofthe last half century is unusual in at least the previous 1300 years. The last time the polar regions were signiHcantly warmer than present for an extended period (about 125,000 years ago), reductions in polar ice volume led to 4 to 6 meters of sea level rise.

ES Hawaii Natural Erwrgy Initltuta

Projections of Future Changes In Climate

Best estimate for low scenario (Bl) is 1 .S^C {likely range is I.I^C to 2.9°C). and for high scenario (A1Fl)is4.0''C (likely range is 2.4°C to 6.4°C).

consistent with span quoted for SRES in TAR, but not directly comparable

P ^ Hawaii natural Enargy Inatltuti 20

10

Projections of Future Changes in Climate

Projected warming in 21st century expected to be

greatest over land and at most high northem latitudes

and least over the Southern Ocean and parts of the North Atlantic Ocean

• k htawall Natural Enwgy Irntltuta

B H un MI|Wlfc.JJM»»

Changes in Precipitation, Increased Drought

Significantly increased precipitation in eastern parts of North and South America, northem Europe and northem and central Asia. The frequency of heavy precipitation events has increased over most land areas - consistent with warming and increases of atmospheric water vapor Drying in the Sahel, the Mediterranean, southem AfHca and parts of southem Asia. More intense and longer droughts observed since the 1970s, particularly in the tropics and subtropics.

M M Hawaii Natural Enargy Irwiltula 2 ^ UM^c—warg*! M j r i im i i

22

n

^ •••: T F i T T - ^ e in PGin . Drought Is increasing . . . , . . ,. ._^

.: oyer^landtihtropics and-, , subtrdpic f r i^^

'the monthly Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDS!) for 1900 to 2002.

The time series (below) accounts for most of the trend in PDSI.

23

1900 1920 1840 1960 19B0 2000

Extreme Weather

< HKJBsrT, » ^ i r N. acr-acr w I AilwUePa

%

•|NATURE|V6l436iii'August"2bbsi

Continued COj emission will lead to warmer sea-surface temperatures

Warmer sea-surface temperatures have been associated with increase hurricane intensity

m 1U0 1BS0 leoo ISTD i8at) leoo noo zoio

Ff f ioa 11 A mcatBra «f tha to ta l po«ar d i u l p a t t d an iwd ly by tr»p4caJ c y d o n c i In thaHer tb M t a n t k n h a p M f a r d b i t t a t l m h d a , PDDtomparwd l a S « p t m b e r M a i u r f K « t t m | M f « a r « 4 S S T > . T h c F D I h u b r a x n u k f i f i a l by l . l X 1D~ " and A i t SST, ot tahied from ihc i ladlcy CxMrr S n Ice ttnd 55T<iaU K t (H>d]S<rrr° , k i w r a i r d v m • b m bouniUd in I t i i n i i k b r 6* N and 1 > * N , I I M ] fn bnfJlDdc b f I O ' W i n d 60 'W. Rodi ^ i n t i a c i h n * bcim •iDOOlhcd twice l u i n f cqnfl iDn (J) .and • camtHnt o f i d h u bmn added l o t h t tanjWTMive d t ta ( b r n v o f a>np* r tMn . N M t that I O M I Atlantic hoir icaiM p a r r a dinipal ioQ hai n u n dian d o i i U i a the pai l M r r . 24

. T . . - M . < » n * f r

12

PROJECTIONS OF FUTURE CHANGES IN CLIMATE

Anthropogenic warming and sea level rise would continue for centuries due to the timescales associated with climate processes and feedbacks, even if greenhouse gas concentrations were to be stabilized.

Temperatures in excess of 1.9 to 4.6°C warmer than pre-industrial sustained for millennia...eventual melt ofthe Greenland ice sheet. Will raise sea level by 7 m. Comparable to 125,000 years ago.

Very likely that hot extremes, droughts, heat waves, and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent

• ^ Hawaii Natural Enttrgy InatltuU 25

Technology and Policy Instruments - Solutions

Technology options

Recent policies in other states and countries

• • Hawaii Natural Enwgy Irutltuta 26

13

Technology is a Key: Significant Advances Needed to Achieve the Base Case

Tf;iL4i f ilP'f .'AVr,- • >

REmissions^. ^f.*f::; ; . where today's technology will take us

• 75% of electricity non-fossil • End-use efficiency increases

1%/yr 2050 • Electric generation 67% efficient • Passenger vehicles average

50mpg Where more advanced versions of current technologies wiil take us Path we need to be on to stabilize

if^ atmospheric COj

ITo stabilize atSSOppm. Carbon/$GpP must be <10% of today's bv 2100

• V Hawaii Natural Enargy Inslltut*

il 27

Carbon Management: No Silver Bullet, Need to Track Life Cycles

D e c a r b o n i z a t i o n CO, ^ — ? —

^ Btu

• Nuclear • Renewables

• ^ Hawaii Matural Enargy Inatftuta

iil --= •

S e q u e s t r a t i o n

< CO, atm

CO, emittod

Regional Partnerships Capture/storage

Efficiency Btu

< GDP

End-use Technologies

2S

14

Renewable Energy; The Big Picture

RE Technology

Wind

Solar PV

Solar Thermal

Biomass Combustion

Biomass Gasification

Ocean Energy

Status

Commercial

Commercial

Demo & Pre-Commercial

Commercial

Pilot & Demo

Pilot & Demo

2004 World Installed MW

47,600

3,900

370

20,000

<20

<20

Issues

Grid Integration

Conversion Efficiency & Cost

High Capital Cost

High Fuel Cost

Hot Gas Cleanup

Cost and Reliability

US Refrigerator Use vs. Time: Current Energy Intensity Trends Already Track

"Voluntary" Programs

3 S t » — I M t W n 1 l l * » W i l n i M T i 1 i » B i i i 30

15

Sequestration: Why Capture and Storage?

' c i i t i j id u>mt o»4Miihr co;

• 4 HawaU Natural Energy Inttltuta ^ 5 | Id— • Q w MM e i »t>riii nMTHn ••»>

Two major challenges for economically viable, environmentally acceptable CCS - Lower cost capture - Reduced uncertainty of

storage permanence, safety, etc.

Need resolve both to gain acceptance *^ keep coal as option Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership program - Focus OD saline

aquifers, EOR - Basalt formations as

R&D activity

Estimates of Global Capacity For Large Scale CCS Deployment Implies Usage of Deep Saline

Formations

a 1,000

\ 800 a

?.. 600

400

71 P 1

— J

Dooley, et al. Estimate of 200

Global Q R e s e r v o i r Coal Basins Depleted Oil Gas Basins Dsep Saline Daep Saline C a p a c i t y Plays Fonnation Formation-I HattallNatdra ES

Oral Energy Institute On-shore Off-shore ( ••« « Own (M • • • ( H H IM T

Sllda cour tesy of GTSP

32

16

A Number of Activities Are Underway to Address the Problem

• Kyoto Protocol - now in effect - European Union response to Kyoto

- Can we Ieam from Montreal Protocol?

• RGGI - Good news: nine states and institutions coming together in a bi

partisan fashion, offsets in place (SF6, landfill gas, end use efficiency, methane from animal waste, etc.)

- Bad news: very real concems about "leakage," only one sector (electricity) is planned for regulation

• AB 32 (California) - Good news: bi-partisan approach to address the problem

- Bad news: little prior knowledge of how to link aggressive public m ^ Hawaii ipftLiflafetff itecbnological realities 3,

iii rr::zr;r:

Carbon "Markets" - Need Source/Sink Baselines

Allowance markets ~ "Cap and t rade" programs that allocate GHG emissions that can be traded to achieve compliance goals.

AAU trading between countries under the Kyoto Protocol - EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS)

Worked efiectivcly for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides in lhe USA

Credit markets - "Baseline and credit" schemes in which GHG "offsets" or "credits" are awarded for GHG abatement projects that reduce emissions against a project baseline and are traded and used for compliance purposes.

- Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (Jl) program

- Chicago Climate Exchange {CCX) and other voluntary schemes (RECs)

Carbon Tax - can govemment create level playing field

- Must be "fair" to all economic sectors - utilities, transponation, other sectors

Must be societally "fair" - carbon taxes will tend to be regressive taxes

P ^ Hawaii Natural Enefgy Initltule 2 5 | M M ^aMMP.<r.»i[» •• » j T i » i . i ^

34

17

European Union Emissions Trading Scheme - Overview

• Mandatory COj emissions "cap and trade" program. - Launched January 1, 2005. - World's first multi-national CO2 ETS and the world's largest emissions

trading program of any kind. - Establishes important precedents likely to impact development of future

GHG trading programs in the EU, the US and elsewhere.

• Designed to help 27 EU nations to achieve their Kyoto Protocol defined CO2 emissions targets. - EU combined CO; emissions target is 1990 levels -8% - Each nation has its own Kyoto emissions target based on the

EU's "Burden Sharing Agreement"

• EU ETS covers -46% of all EU COj emissions. Remaining CO2 emissions are covered by other "policies & measures."

• A. Diamant, EPRI

• ^ Hawaii Natural Energy Ingtltuta 35

HNEI Links R&D and Public Policy to Commercialization Process

Basic Research

& Development

National Laboratories

Universities

Collaborative Technology

Development Integration Application

[institutional

Technology Commercialization

Suppliers

Vendors

End Users

• • Hawaii Natural Enerov Insiltuta

Government 36

Driving to a Sustainable Future; Hawaii Can be a Leader

Environment

Energy

Economics

Equity

Education

Warming Won't Wai t Will We?

19

Hawaii's Greenliouse Gas Emissions Inventory

Dr. John Tantlinger Energy Planning and Policy Branch Manager State or Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism Strategic Industries Division http://www.hawa ll.gcft//dt?edt/lnfQ/enenjv

Presentation by Invitation of:

Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) Integrated Resource Planning (IRP)

Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming

State Capitel Auditorium June 8, 2007

Overview

Hawaii's Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory Project • Context and Purpose • Inventory Methodology and Assumptions Preliminary Update of 1990 and 2005 GHG Estimates - By Sector

Additional Information Sources

http://www.hawa

Hawaii's GHG Inventory Project: 1994-1998

Phase I - statewide Inventory GHG Emissions Estimates a start point for Greenhouse Reduction Strategy for state of Hawaii Phase I I -- Hawaii Climate Change Action Plan Joint project -- DBEDT Strategic Industries Division, and Department of Health Clean Air Branch (DOH contractor non-energy sectors: UH Environmental Center)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency grant and assistance: • Identifying state's greenhouse gas emissions sources and

estimating overall contribution to global warming; • Assessing areas of state most vulnerable to climate change; and • Developing state-specific greenhouse gas mitigation strategies

Hawaii's GHG Inventory Project (1994-1998) Context and Purpose

Context • Part of national effort under U.S. Climate Change

Action Plan to meet U.S. goals under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Purpose • Inventory and understand Hawaii's GHG • Foundation of second-phase Hawaii Climate Change

Action Plan

• First step to developing mitigation measures

Inventory (Methodology and Assumptions

Methodo logy

Used data for energy use, industrial processes, agriculture, municipal waste management, crop w/aste burning, fertilizer use, and land use changes.

Formulae provided by USEPA to calculate estimated emissions of CO2, methane (CH^) and nitrous oxides N2O, the three principal GHG*

Reported global warming potential of CO2, CH^, and NjO emissions in short tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (COjE)*.

Assumpt i ons

GWP factors provided by EPA at time: C02 = 1

• CH4 = 22 (now 21)

• N20 = 270 (now 310)

CO2 emissions from burning of bagasse, macadamia nut shells, and wood chips for electricity and process heat not included in total as fuels sequester CO; in growing stage and were assumed replanted

Hawaii estimate did not indude exported fuels or overseas uses

Excluded military aviation fuel emissions

'Note: Calculated precunor gases cmLsslons BtJmates: nitrogen oxides (NOx), a r t o n monoxide (CO), and nor-methane volatlle organic compounds (NMVOQ, but not part of GWP due to USEPA tools' then lack of axwerslon factors.

R a n t m b i Commtrc ia i Mu i t r i a l

Eltclrle ei>einc U B H I M { t n l PP>)

Sround TisntDortalion

Somi iUc Aviiilon mnd Mjrlna

in i imt t lon i l Avtailon and Marin*

Prallmlnary Estlmalt of Hawaii's Grcsnhous* Gat Emltslona In 1S90 and ZOOS Exprcascd as Global Warming Potential

8tHlan>fY/SufcCot iU

7.BB4,31S ,

| |a! t i '3?i^i l |M/

T r * n » p o r t t i l o n S u b t o M i

E N E R C Y T O T A L

i . i ^ i l ^ . y N O N i e N E R G Y S E C T p R ' ^ ^ ^ . ^ ? ;

Induiulal P r o c a i i a i : OIVGai Tram partition, ReTriing. Siorage

IrxtutiWI P r o c o x n C>w»ni Wanutacmring'

I n d u i l r l i l P r o e m * • Subtotal

MSW i<tanae«m*ni

M*(tei i i ( t*r Tiaauncni

Domatiic Animal*

Manur* Ma nag t m ant

Sugarcan* Burning

' * m i i * i U**

N O N - £ N E f < G Y T O T A L

TOTAL

3. BBS. BBS

3.S00.S91

e>3I.25S

1 4 , J 0 l . t 4 4

31 .1 )1 , I16

i^-aiiwsB

114,111

i . i a t . i e i

11.SB3

2T3.a7S

I7S.78B

31.fiSI

S0.B50

i . 7 > i . » »

I J 7 1 . M 2

B.039.BT1

,i,ii3ii,eTil 4.Sai.B07

3717.030

4.722.044

H , 4 1 1 , H 7

i4.743,a»C

,.^200S*t[iJ

S,1S7

1.701.ICU

23.62)

1S2.IIS

Sa.774

10.787

02.310

3,053,110

I 4 . t 2 S J 7 3 . : i , T « 9 , 7 4 0

F t i c t n a g * Chinp*

j j^:i i»M»Mr "

111.7%

|3!!B%I

21.3%

•4.2%

• 2 t . l %

•3.5%

•-".VJSl^iFL'J^J.^

t ! >« l l i n l na ry tE< t l i i i a tMS 'on "a 'Y ; I0 l>7 . ) i i . i i h to«u i yH i>

-•S.SX

4«.3%

10.>%

•10.B%

-sa.3%

• M . 3 %

1.4S

14.4%

Notes: I . Al BdmHes were olculitBt] isjng Ott rormulH and p ioadua Itwn the Slate Worlitoot HdJmliJbglp t v Esdnotlng CrtcnhouM C H Emtfors , S r o m EdUton, U5 Emiitnmcntal Pnucuon Agencv (USB"A) Offlce trf Polry, Planning, and EvabaUon, 199S, c a e t t at ditciased betaw.

2 Due to durcteiKcs nnpa r td to the Halntand ki Kawi l ' i d l DanscoiUtlon, rcAnIng, ind Borage rAteni l . and In its iitHv B** prpductton, i t u a g ^ tnitynHrior, ant dtartbuttoi tyOem, niuf l iY-cakculated cfnsslons csOmacci urtrc iscd for 1990. Thb nlue w n crtnpohced iuwinJ udng data on total all knpcils and uOlity g n n l s , the key vartatjies upon whlOi the estimates were based.

] . Tlie vakies reported b r 1990 m DBEDTt UMM Irrwitorv rf HtwMI Greenntase GM Emoiot t , EstUntta h r 1990, (Hashed in 1997, wen lecjKuUted isng updated data and new amws lon tetoif to catculate global wvmkig poMiOaL In late 1997, tne ractur lood to cmven t i m or methane (CH4] to tons tf Carun DkMdc-EquMlent (C02E1 was changed hom 22 to 71 and the conveison tacior for Mtnus Cbdde (N20) to torn Of C02E wai hcreated rmm 270 to 310 on the basts ol nndlngs of ttie Inteigonemmentil Panel on c inute Change and the use c^the newfaacnnsaccepted t>y the USEPA.

Energy Sector Remains Largest GHG Emission Source - Slight Improvement

1990

Energy - gz.SVo

2005

Oom* ale AvtaHon

and Wir in*

E n e r g y - 9 2 . 3 %

Preliminary Update of 1990 Inventory and 2005 Estimate: Other Limitations & Improvement Needs

I Acquisition of new data needed to enliance accuracy

I Data improvement needs • Diesel fuel use • Marine fuel use • Military fuel use in Hawaii • Fertilizer use

• Land use changes

• Data transparency

Meeting Regulatory Challenges: EPA-Hawaii Partnership

On February 12, 2007, Hawaii joined EPA's Clean Energy-Environment State Partnership • Includes 14 other states • EPA provi(des partner states with comprehensive technical

assistance in planning, policy, technical, analytical an(d information resources

• Also works to establish linkages to other federal programs that support clean energy-environment strategies

Reduction of GHG emissions is one of Hawaii's key areas • In late May 2007, EPA experts advised that EPA's state

emissions inventory estimation models not intended for regulatory purposes - emissions, baseline target-setting

• DBEDT and DOH working with EPA experts to develop improvements to Hawaii's models, as resources permit

Additional Information Sources

Hawaii Greenfiouse Gas Inventory, Estimates for 1990(1997)* • httpV/www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/energy/publications/

Hawaii Climate Change Action Plan (1998) • http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedtyinfo/energy/publications/

Hawaii Energy Strategy 2000 (2000) • httD://www.hawaii.qov/dbedt/info/enerQy/Dublications/he520QQ.Ddf

Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Ciiange • http://www.ipcc.ch/

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Climate Change Web Site • http://epa.gov/climatechange/index.html

*Note: Electronic Hie to be reposted on DBEDT website - expeaed download availability date: June 15, 2007)

http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/energy/publications/

http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedtyinfo/energy/publications/

http://www.hawaii.qov/dbedt/info/enerQy/Dublications/he520QQ.Ddf

http://www.ipcc.ch/

http://epa.gov/climatechange/index.html

Hawaii's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory

I^AHALO!



Advfsory Group Technical Session Oimate Oiang^Global Warming

State Capitol Auditorium June 8,2007

Climate Change Impact to Hawaii's Shoreline

Sea-LeveC^se New research in 2007 indicates: 1. Doubled melting rate of Greenland ice sheet (57 cubic miles/year), 2. Net melting ofthe Antarctic ice sheet (36 cubic miles/year), 3. Global rise has exceeded 3.0 mm/yr, twice the rate last century, 4. Continued heating of atmosphere - heating of water column, 5. 1 m rise is now expected during this century. 6. 3°C temperature rise suggests 3-6 m sea-level rise in a century.

There are still major uncertainties in sea-level science, but these latest results are significant in that: 1. They do not point in the direction of smaller r^tes of rise, 2. They are consistent with the worse case of longstanding predictions, 3. Counter arguments grow fewer and fewer.

2) Antarctic ice loss 152km3/yr+/-80km3/yr

2002.5 2003 2003.5 2004 2004.5 2005 2005.5 Calendar Vear

JUUU T7 u uu vv -JU u u TT

150'OCW leo'co" ISO^CCE

3) Thermal expansion

200* AnfUioi Mxin SMac* T«mp*[qtvw Anomoti** {'Oj

:.i •; 1L 1 - i -2 .1 5 1 1.5 > 16

Contributions to sea level

• Alpine glaciers and ice caps: 0.5 m • Greenland: 7.2 m D West Antarctic: 5-6 m • Sea level rise due to ice melt? ...aSout haCf • Sea level rise due to ttiermal expansion?

...aSout fiaff

B Sea level budget poorly understood

0.6

O 0.4

^ 0.2 E o c < n <D ^ B

3

2 -0.2 (U o. E ^ -0.4

.... .

^ a.

N t Ac

2 -0.6

I I

Global Temperatures -•-: Annual Average

— ; Five Year Average

1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Recent Sea Level Rise 23 Annual Tide Gauge Records — Three Year Average — Satellite Altimetry i

35

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

-C^ 3.5 CO 0)

E 3 E Q) 2.5

C

^ 2 O

§ 1-5 (U

_ j

OJ 1 QJ 1 CO k * -

° 0.5 0)

. 4 -1

CC 0

' Correlation of rate of sea-level rise to temperature, 1881-2001

r /

• y

\

/ . •

^ \ y ^

. % • • • y

y

i ^ ^ l-^ ^

\ . / •

/ Rahmstorf, 2007 Science v. 315 /

-0.5 0

Warming above 1951-1980 mean

y

'

'

_

•

0.5

0

5

E- ° o

"ai ^ -5 ID - J 0)

CO , 1 0

^15

•

Sea-level change Red - smoothed trend Blue - computed from temp. Red points - unsmoolhed data

^

. ^ ^ . ^

< < ^ '

1B80 1900 1920 1940 1960 Year

y -A

• ^y^ '

•

1980 2000

Sea level history and projections 1990-2100 based on IPCC temperature range of 1.4 - 5.8°C

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

-20

Sea level riseof 0.5 to 1.4 m by 2100

1900 1950 2000 Year

2050 2100

Flooding scenarios, Hawaii

B+1 m sea level rise B+0.44 high tide B+0.3 m heavy rain fall (April, 2006)

2371

22'N

21'N

201^

IP'N

IS'N

Surface Currents over Height (cm) NRL global NCOM glb8_2f

07-01-2003 OOZ OOOOm

L59'W ISS'W 157'W 156'W 155'W 154'W Velocity Scale: 30 cm/s . . (Firing and Mcrrifidd. 2004)

Hawai'i Climate Change Policy: An Environmental Perspective

Henry Curtis, Executive Director Life of the Land (LOL)

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change / Global Warming - June 8, 2007

Presentation Overview

• What Happens When Money Drives Social Policy?

• Climate Change Is Real

• Different Approaches

• How Do We Choose a Path?

• Issues: • * True Costs • * Externalities • * Artif icial Boundaries

• Impor tant Tools • * Greenhouse Input-Output Models • * Ufe Cycle Assessments.

HECO IRP Advisory Group Toclinical Session Climate Change/Global V /arming - June 8. 2007

MONEY

• Money can be used for good or for self-serving purposes.

• "Follow the money and it will reveal at! things"

• Truthiness is a satirical term coined by television comedian Stephen Colbert to describe things that a person claims to know intuitively or "from the gut without regard to evidence, logic, intellectuafexamination, or actual facts.

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Cliniate Change/Global Warming - June 8, 2007

FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY

' Public Opinion Polls (early 1990s): global warming is real

Fossil Fuel Industry Campaign to promote skepticism

Global Climate Coalition (GCC) and 75 other front groups

' Funded In part by Exxon, Edison Electric Institute

" I t is difficult to get a man to understand something when nis job depends on not understanding it." — Sinclair Lewis

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June 8. 2007

CLIMA TE CHANGE I S REAL

The melting of Greenland and Antarctica will have enormous impact on the world.

If l/6th of Greenland melts, most of Waikiki and Kailua are submerged. So is the Reef Runway.

If 1/3 of Greenland melts most of downtown is under water.

SOEST website: local impacts due to sea level rise

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming • June 6, 2007

Fossil Fuel Industry

• Early Message ... what... climate change? ... too uncertain

• New Message: We can have both fossil fuel & climate change mitigation

• Capture waste stream • algae for biodiesel • hydrogen for fuel cells • sequester gases in soil, mines & deep oceans

• clean coal HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June 8, 2007

Biofuel Industty • Early Message: Solve energy crisis

w i th genetic engineering & biorefineries

• New Message: Life sciences wi l l solve our problems.

• Biofuels supported by Life Sciences industry (genetic engineers) and Fossil Fuel Industry (agricultural is very fossil fuel intensive).

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning - June 8, 2007

Self-Reliant Proponents

Real Renewables: wind, solar thermal, solar electric, wave, ocean thermal, sea water air conditioning

Smart Regulation: green pricing, smart meters, etc.

Energy Equivalence: 100 acres of biofuel crops = 1 acre of solar and 99 acres of food

• We can have both energy security and food security

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - Juno 8, 2007

HOW DO WE CHOOSE A PATH?

We are at a crossroads. There are many paths that we can take:

denial of climate change: fossil fuels

a modified fossil fuel path: biofuels

a true portfolio approach that is a combination of resources to provide stability, security, and self-reliance - a hybrid approach to providing the energy necessary for our communities.

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June B, 2007

PATHS

Some paths lead to places we need to go, some to places that we should stay away from, and some delay the day of reckoning. We need a way to determine which paths are those that will help lead Hawai' I toward self-reliance.

Past Hawai'i paths: Mongoose, Miconia, Coqui Frog

With climate change, we do not have the luxury of venturing onto several wrong paths before getting onto a right path.

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June 8, 2007 10

D r . S h i m o n A W e r b U C h , me former Semor Advisor for Energy Economics, Finance and Technology with the International Energy Agency in Paris

• Surprisingly, IRP and similar processes have not engendered investigations and debates about appropriate procedures for valuing resource alternatives.

• While these processes raise all sorts of planning issues, everyone seems quite content to leave the seemingly arcane procedures for estimatinq levelized electricity (busbar) costs to the green-visor types witn little meaningful outside review/.

• This means that some of the firm's most important decisions are made on the basis of black-box output that few truly understand.

• Busbar cost comparisons tend to overstate the cost of renewable options relative to traditional fossil alternatives.'

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June S. 2007 11

EXTERNALITIES

• Businesses maximize both profits and sharetiolder returns by minimizing costs.

• One way of minimizing costs is to shift a cost from a business to society.

• This shifted cost is not evaluated in comparing alternative energy futures.

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June 5. 2007 12

Consumer Advocate

Q. Are you concerned with taxpayer and ratepayer impacts.

A. No. Just ratepayer impacts.

Questions by Life of the Land, Answers by the Consumer Advocate

HECO's proposed 2009 Campbell Industrial Pari< power plant


Boundaries * Limitations * Reductionism

• HECO decreased its carbon emissions from 1990 to 2007 but increased its use of third party power.

• Cars spew toxics out of the tailpipe but toxics are also used to make the cars and the roads.

• Buildings consume energy not only in their use, but in their construction and demolition.

• More greenhouse gas emissions arrived in the atmosphere from natural processes that from industrial processes.

• By limiting the discussion to a narrow subset of an industrial process, tne wrong solution is often arrived at.


7776 social costs of biofuels: Greenhouse gases: Indonesia #3 in world for greenhouse gas emissions. Destroying rainfore burning peat soil to create palm oil plantations

• Labor: Malaysia is using imported labor to grow palm oil, some grown on land that was destroyed to grow rubber.

• Indonesia and Malaysia: 85% of world palm oil trade.

• Brazil's Amazon rainforest is being used for both soy oil production, and to plant agricultural crops displaced by sugar plantations


Measurement Uncertainty

• Agricultural releases of

• Non-Point Source Water Pollution • Greenhouse Gas Emissions

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate ChangeyGlobal Wanning - June 8, 2007 16

8

Faulty Measurement Assumptions

• Biofuels are carbon neutral

• Fossil Fuels should have a carbon tax of $0/ton

HECO IRP Advisory Gnsup Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning - June 8, 2007 17

Economic Input-Out Models

Traditionally, input-output models are used to determine how employment and income change due to a change in a given input.

When goods are purchased, the employees, the owners, and the stockholders all gain, the store must buy replacement goods from upstream, etc.

Accounting for all primary, secondary and tertiary impacts allows DBEDT to calculate the economic multiplier effect for a given action.

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning - June 8, 2007 18

Greenhouse Input-Out Models

• Constructed to determine how greenhouse gas emissions change due to a change in a given input.

• Japanese researchers have built a greenhouse gas input out model

• More work Is needed


Japanese Greenhouse 10 Model

• Energy Consumption and Carbon Dioxide Emission Intensities Based on Input-Output Analysis

• Center for Global Environmental Research (CGER)

• Kyoto University Graduate School of Energy Sciences

• www-CQer.nies.qo.ip/cQer-e/db/d031 e/3eid e.html


10

Life Cycle Analysis

Life Cycle Assessments measure the total impact from cradle-to-grave, or, in the case of recycling, from cradle-to-cradle.

The energy and other resources needed to make a good include mining raw materials, processing raw materials, making the product, using the product, and disposing of the product.

It includes the infrastructure needed and the labor employed.


Life Cycle Analysis re Energy. Cars: Manufacture vs. Use Carnegie Mellon University, 1998 www, ilea, orq/lcas/madeanlave 1998. html

Energy Toxics

' * ' ' * * • InMnnca M . U I U J M.S53UJ i t h g

Finl c fO* I InKTWica 20 ^ \ I / OSiQ


11

Life Cycle Analysis: Electric vs. Gasoline Cars Seikei University, Tokyo (2001)

www.ilea.ora/lcas/taharaetal20Ql.html

HECO IRP Advisory Gnjup Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June 8, 2007 23

Alternative Scenarios

Fossil Fuel Scenario

Ethanol Scenario

Ocean Power Scenario

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning - June 8. 2007 24

12

http://www.ilea.ora/lcas/taharaetal20Ql.html

Fossil Fuel Scenario

Fossil fuel is extracted from Indonesia, sent by oii tanker to Hawaii, and refined by Chevron and Tesoro.

These refineries rank Sth and Sth, respectively, on the EPA's Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) for Hawai' i facilities.

The refineries make bunker fuel which is then burned at Kahe or Waiau, which ranks #1 and #3, respectively, on the TRI list.

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning • June 8. 2007 25

Ethanol Scenario

• HECO imports ethanol made by Kauai Ethanol LLC.

• Each gallon of ethanol is made from biomass grown at Gay & Robinson and mixed with 4.18 pounds of imported Australian coal.

• In terms of BTUs, the coal represents 58-63% of the energy content of the ethanol.

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wamiing - June 8, 2007 26

13

Ocean Power Scenario

A Sea Water Air Conditioning system is constructed with pipes located between the ocean, Waikiki, and UH Manoa.

A reinforced concrete Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) barge is located 2.9 miles off Kahe Point with a transmission line to the Kahe Transmission Substation.

The SWAC 8i OTEC systems use ocean water as a source of thermal and electric energy.


State Law & Mother Nature

• state law: fossil fuel scenario is fossil fuel and biofuel and ocean power scenarios are renewable

• All three systems use some fossil fuels and all three systems release greenhouse gases

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wamiing - June 8. 2007 28

14

Life Cycle Analysis

Minimal greenhouse gas emission analysis:

Petroleum extracting; coal mining; soil-atmosphere interactions from growing crops; shipping petroleum, coal and palm oif; making concrete; refining petroleum; converting coal and biomass into ethanol; burning bunker fuel and ethanol.

Units: Tons of C02 equivalent per MWh of electricity produced or displaced averaged over the life cycle of the facility or process


CarlSagan

• "Anytliing else you're interested in is not going to happen i f you can't breathe the air and drink the water Don't sit this one ou t Do something. Vou are by accident o f fate alive a t an absolutely critical moment in the history o f our p lane t "

HECO IRP Advisory Gnaup Technical Session Cliniate Change/Global Wamiing - June 8, 2007 30

15

Contact Information

• Henry Curtis • Executive Director • Life ofthe Land • Henry,LifeoftheLand@gmail,com • Cell: 808-927-0709 • www.lifeofthelandhawaii.ora

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning - June 8. 2007 31

16

http://www.lifeofthelandhawaii.ora

Nov. 8, 2006

rmrf:.'

LJC^^i•HI•M•B••i•iB•|M•B^•••M^••K''•V'"<^-V!'. '^:;.;;;v-'-, ' ; '!;;^

fc. • ' < • " .

(inmnDii •jff?7?)G7i=EHinimfei.(!T^

>:3a!:i5K r^i>^vaii7Sanni'€i:rjfgiT23\7i:Qi^

•••••••ijj'i-.', .?.-*i'i'! ' . ' - • i ^n ' - ' - -T iVi t ' i i

i

> Reduce carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 > Inqjlcmentation Task Force (recommend specifics)

• 4nienibCT5froraaffectedbusinessseclor3, deputy direclor of DOH's Environmental Health Administration (or designee), director of DBEDT (or designee), 2 membeis from UH's CCC, 2 members from environmenlal organizations

• Cost effective rules and market-based mechanisms to achieve targets

> Role of DOH • Work with DBEDT to "update" 1997 inventory of emission sources by

December 31.2008

• Establish limits, especially for electncity gen and auto emissions

• Monitor and enforce compliance

June 8,2007 httpy/www uhcio hiwHi edxi #

http://www.uhero.hawaii.edu Copyright UHERO 2006

http://www.uhero.hawaii.edu

Market-based incentives for carbon cao & trade?

> Carbon tax: what price?

> Cap and trade (e.g. European Union, Caiifomia) • Cap quantity at below current level; gradtially reduce to

1990 level. Market decides the price.

June B. lOOT httpJIwww ti)cn> hnvaii olu


Nov. 8, 2006

Limiting Emissions: ~ • ns and Questions MTTg!»=lil«llil>BM¥il»lrari

> 1990 inventory: How to update DBEDT inventory? Who will certify? (Capture theory)

> Give away initial allocation: • 1990 emission levels for all existing firms. Problem:

technology has changed. Industries that have switched since 1990 or are switching to energy efficient technology anyway get windfall profit.

• Cost-effective conqjUance (marginal avoidance cost is equal across firms)

> Auction peimits: revenue can be used for lump-sum tax rebates for carbon emitters or general taxpayers.

June t, 2007 hapJ/www.uhcn> tiiwui.cdu


http://www.uhcn

Regulated Sources

> Electric utilities > Gasoline (refining + imports)

> Non-electricity industrial energy > Other commercial energy > Military and other large users

> Medium and small-sized business. How small?

June S. 2007 hop://* '.uhcn> luwiii edu


Nov. 8, 2006

Three ways of meeting target

1. Reduce emissions among regulated sources

2. Reduce emissions among unregulated sources (apply for and sell credits)

3. Offset credits for sequestration

> HB 226 does not distinguish these. (Further legislation?)

> Sequestration: requires reliable benchmarking

> Unregulated Sources: requires certification (claims adjustor)

June g, 2007 hnpy/www uhoo hawtii edu


Nov. 8, 2006

SB 3185

> Renewable Portfolio Standards (6/2/06): By 2020, 20% net energy sales must be represented by renewable energy. Minimum 10% from TGJ\ewab\e generation of electricity (e.g., H-Power) • Rest can come from "renewable savings" brought about by use

of heat pumps, solar water heaters, etc. that "replace" electricity-using devices. (You can count devices installed in the 80s.)

> Achieve 10% (minimum 5% from generation) by 2010.

June S, 2007 htip//www lAeiD bawsii edu

> Renewable generation already around 6%. If renewable savings comprise at least 4% of net electricity sales, then HECO (mcluding HELCO and MECO) has already met its 2010 requirement.

June B, 2007 hOpJIvww ubero hcwtii edu



Economic Approach to Energy Transition and Carbon Reduction: Price Incentives

> Efficiency pricing: charge marginal cost for the marginal units. Intramarginal blocks and hook-up charge can be adjusted for normal retums.

> Transparent billing

June B, 2007 http//www uhcni hawaii edu


Nov. 8, 2006

Peak-load Pricing (e.g, con Ed of NY, PG&E of CA)

Peak demand Quantity

June g, 2W7 hap://www.uhcro hawaii odu


http://www.uhcro

Nov. 8, 2006

Demand Management avoids

Capacitv Expansion

> Flex contracts (e.g. Caiifomia fridge control)

a) Flat rebate (Hawaii)

b) Proportional rebate (preset prices)

c) Proportional rebate (peak load prices)

hop /'www uheio hawui edu

Block Pricmg

Price

1" block

^

June 8, 2007

1 ^ b l o c k \ \ /

.. -•--'''' Demand

hap^/www uhcn) htwtii edu



Net Metering for Renewable Generation

> Reconciliation period should allow more complete banking (e.g. a Sept. 30 ending date would fail to compensate consumers with summer surplus)

> Monthly fixed customer charge ($7) should be minimal (reading meter and billing).

June S, 2007 hnpy/www.idicTO hawaii ettu


Nov. 8, 2006

Incentivize and Facilitate: Don't Dictate

> The man of system ... is so enamoured with the supposed beauty of his own ideal plan ... that he cannot suffer the smallest deviation from any part of it. ... He seems to imagine that be can arrange the different members ofa great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess-board. He does not consider ... that. In the great chess-board of human society, every single piece has a principle of motion of its own, altogether different from that which the legislature might choose to impress upon it.

~ Adam Smith > Uniunded mandates

• Redundant • Unintended consequences

> Get the prices right, including environmental costs

JujK S, 2007 httpV/www liiaa hawui.cdu

http://www.idicTO


Nov. 8, 2006

Mahalo!

(Any conclusions and/or opinions herein are not necessarily those of UHM or UHERO)



Renewable Energy Options and Strategies for Controlling

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

David Rezachek, Ph.D., P.E. Hawaii Renewable Energy Alliance (HREA)

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change / Global Warming - June 8, 2007

Presentation Overview

Renewable Energy - What It Is and Why It's Needed

- Renewable Energy Resources

- Renewable Energy Development Potential on Oahu

* Status of Conversion Tochnologlos

' Learning Curve Analysis

- Life Cycle Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Benefits

* Sourca-to-End Use (Pathway) Analysis

- Comparative Benefits of Various Renewable Energy Technologies

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global WanTiing - Juna 8, 2007

Renewable Energy

What It Is - Renewable Energy is energy derived from resources

that are regenerative or for all practical purposes cannot be depleted

Why It's Needed - Abundant - Diverse - Available locally - Reduces the need for fossil fuels - Reduces greenhouse gas and other emissions

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June 6, 2007

Renewable Energy Resources

Biomass / Biofuels Geothermal Hydroelectric Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) / Landfill Gas Ocean Thermal (Seawater Air conditioning [SWAC] / OTEC) Solar - Electric (Photovoltaic [PV]) - Thermal (Water Heating / Process Heat)

Wave Wind

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June 8, 2007

Factors Affecting Renewable Energy Development Potential

• Resource Availability -Spatial (Where) -Temporal (When)

• Resource Intensity • Status of Conversion Technologies •Cost

- Current - Future (Learning Curve Analysis)


Status of Conversion Technologies

Research Stage

Demonstration Stage

Commercially Available

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Changs/Global Warming • June 8, 2007 8

Learning Curve Analysis

• Learning curves, learning-by-doing curves, or experience curves provide a means for assessing potential future cost reductions in a particular technology

• A technology learning curve defines the unit cost of a given technology as a function of the cumulative production (total installed capacity)

• It can be expressed as the equation: - uc = a*CC-b

• Where: - UC = Unit cost - cc = Cumulative capacity in numbers of standardized units - b = Learning index - a = Unit cost of the first unit

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming - June 8. 2007

Learning Curves for Selected Consumer Products

Air Bag

Antl lock -- Brakes

o 4-o

Bular Phona

Personal comp\jfer

70's aO's 90's OO's

HECO IRP Advisory Gnsup Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning - June 8, 2007

Learning Curve for PV Power Modules (197B-2001)

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warning - June 8, 2007

6 0 |

55

1 50

^ = D

ti

U 40 u

Ul

30l

25

20

Residential Grid Parity on Kauai @ 2 kW

^

^ ^ «

^

^

06 2007

^ ^

^ ^

^ C ^

^

t5 —

^

: - ~ ^

t ^ P ^

^

^ ^"=C^

^

^

^

^ ^

y <

' ^ - ~ ~ ,

^ ^

^

^

[ ^

^ - ^

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2011 2015

Ytar

— » - R M Else (Lew) - a — R H E I K (Mictangs) - ^ R a t Elec (Hgh)

-~H-PV Elec (l.nvl ^ i ^ P V E l e c (A\«aoa) - • — P V EIBC(HGG^)

^

2016

^

• ^

* ^

20

L

1

t

1

17

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning - Juno 8, 2007 10

Smal l -sca le Ut i l i ty Gr id Par i ty on Oahu @ 5000 kW

22 =

20

Ul f 18

16

e 3 . 14

u.. >

h - — *

^

„ « ^

^

r

^ ^^•- '

.-=ri fc^

k . ^ ^

^ ?

^

t:^ ^ >

r^ ^ 1:^

^ - ^

^ ^

^ ;

t ^ ^

^

^

x ' - " ^

" ^ ^

^ ^ r'

^

c;;;; ^ - ^

' - - ^

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Year

2016 2017

-AEC (Lo*)

-PVE(oc{l.OWl

-AEC (MKlmnge)

-PVEIec(AN«rage)

•AEC (HiDh)

-PV Elec {Kitfi}


Renewable Energy Development

• Near-Term (0-5 years) (2007-2012) - Solar Thermal (Water Heating / Process Heat) - Wind - Seawater Air Conditioning (SWAC) - Biomass (MSW & Co-Firing? & Biofuels?)

' Mid-Term (5-10 years) (2012-2017) - Wave - Residential Utility-Intertied PV on Neighbor Islands - Commercial-Scale PV - OTEC (5 - 10 MW module)

• Long-Term (10-20+years) (2017-2027+) - OTEC (100 MW) - Residential Utiiity-lntertied PV on Oahu - Utility-Scale PV?

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Changs/Global Wanning - June 6, 2007 12

Renewable Energy Potential on Oahu

T«chnolooy

OTEC

MSW -•• Biomass Co-flrlng

S*awat«r Air Conditioning (SWAC)

Solar Thtrnul (SWH)

Wind

Wav*

PV

TotaU

Oahu Us«

RE a* N of Odhu Electricity Use

Annual Production

tMilllon kWh/vr)

701

342

319

280

140

IS

37

i.9oe

i.ZAt

20.4

System SIz* (MW)

100

eo

100,000 Tons

100,000 Systems

50

28

20

-

-

-

CapacJty Factor

o.eo

0.66

0.62

-

0.32

0.40

0.21

-

•

-

Fraction of Oahu

RsncwabiM I'M

36.8

17.9

18.7

14.7

7.4

4.8

1.9

100.0

-

-

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Waming - June 8, 2007 13

Life Cycle Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Benefits

• Full fuel cycle (pathway) analysis needed to give an accurate picture of: - Energy Benefits - Emissions Benefits

HECO IPP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wanning - June S, 2007 14

Pathway Analysis

Pathway analysis is used to determine the total fossil fuel energy displacement and greenhouse gas (CO2) emissions reductions of renewable energy systems, from the fuel source to the end use

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Wamiing - June 8, 2007 15

Pathway Analysis for SWAC Crude Oii / Refining / LSRFO / Electricity Generation / End User

(Seawater Air Conditioning)

4.42 4.00

Ptoductlon Shipping fbllnlng Bsctr lu l Trantmlai lon Gent ration &

attribution 3.92

3.53

l - O 1.00

31.9% \ ^ m 88.8% '

Bectricity End Uter


8

100,000 Tons of Seawater Air Conditioning Will Reduce:

Electricity use by 344 mil l ion kWh par year

Fossil f u t i energy us t by 4.6 tri l l ion Btu p t r year

Crude oil us* by 7d5,000 barrels per year

Greenhouse gas (COi) emissions by 377,000 tons per year

This is equivalent to: 123 megawatts of uilllty-scala w ind t n t r g y

187 msgawatts of utility-scale photovoltaics

87,000 two-Kilowatt residential photovoltaic systems

60 megawatts of utlhty-scale wast«-to-«n*rgy

52,000 SUVs taken oft tt i« road

115.000Toyota Rhus HEVs

247 mil l ion gallons of Imported, corn-based ethanol per year

SB mil l ion gallons of local, cellulose-based ethanol per year

123,000 residential solar water heating systems

HECO IRP Advisory Group Technical Session Climale Change/Global Warming - June 8, 2007 17

For Additional Information, Please Contact:

David Rezachek. Ph.D., P.E. Associate Development Director

Honolulu Seawater Air Conditioning, LLC 7 Waterfront Plaza, Suite 400

500 Ala Moana Blvd. Honolulu, HI 96813

Cell Phone: (808) 282-5594 Telephone: (608) 543-2024

Fax: (808) 543-6403 EmaiH: [email protected]

Emall2: [email protected]

j ^ Honolu lu Seawater Air Condidoning , LLC




How Energy Efficiency Can Cool The Planet

HECO IRP Advisory Group Options and Strategies for Controlling

GHG Emissions

Brian Kealoha. CEM

#iNi^y

Energy Consumption by U.S. Buildings

fSETT--

72% of U.S. electricity consumption 54% of U.S. natural gas consumption 38% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions

.U.S. buildings alone are responsible for more CO2 emissions than total CO2 emissions of any other country in the world except China

ENERGY i B J l f i > . - « J : — » a

Source- EIA Buildings Energy Databook 2005

U.S. COo Emissions

By Sector

6000

, ;, Qajg^^jl...'

Sector Emissions

ENERGY

By End Use Commercial Emissions

Ochar l iX

Elecuonki t x

Ushtlni 2SK

Residential Emissions

Odi r r i4X

Elccirontu i X

U(hilnt t3X

Source: James McMahon Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

•sy-ri-:

The cost of a kilowatt

saved is less than one-

third the cost of a kilowatt

supplied

Energy Efficiency's potential is greater than all Renewable Energy systems COMBINED

Potential Emissions Reduction (MtQ by2030

Biofuels 58

Sourcvi Tockllng ClhnDt* Chango In tha ( 1 ^ .

hMpt/Aww«uisos.ors/ellntatoehano»

ncentrating solar power

63

ENERGY

I Energy Efficiency FIRST ESETXI

The Institute for Local Self-Rellance recommendsthis hierarchy ior community-wide carbon reduction efforts

• Target direct GHG emissions locally by implementing: - All cost-effective energy efficiency measures - Onsite renewable energy - Switching to cleaner fuels

• Target indirect emissions of GHG emissions in the electricity and transportation sectors

Purchase carbon offsets and/or renewable energy credits

A> ENERGY

The Potential

Net Electricity Savings

f rom Common Sen»

Efficiency Policies

OB U S W I klt»«jlt-lMiri)

i f M

U t o

*fiM

M H

ifioa

IMO

VO.

-

: ^

-

MS)

/ «.«»—

n w

x^ k^

-

m i )

- ^

NM

^^^^

r"^

t o i n a UnW*f CaK«mKlScl««hli, » 0 I

ENERGY

BK-yV'-ygJ-Jl .

It has been shown that energy efficiency alone can offset growth of energy demand Paired with renewable energy, significant greenhouse gas reductions are achievable

How much does this cost?

ENERGY IBJB.BIM.-«J!»ra;^

Cost For One Year

CFL -20 watt

10,000 hours

• Initial Cost $6

• Replacement - $0

• Energy $26 @ $.15

TOTAL COST:

$32

ENERGY

Incandescent - 75 watt

1,000 hours

• Initial Cost $.50

• Replacement - $4

• Energy $98 @ $.15

TOTAL COST:

$102.50

Barriers to achieving widespread energy efficiency

Value Engineering - First cost driven sacrifices efficiency Initial Capital Outlay - Even if it pays for itself, where do you get the money

to start? Products that don't live up to the hype - Fly by night mainland companies with unproven

products and track record can ruin a good technology Hawaii factor - Added expense and limited availability

<^ ENERGY

What actions can be taken to significantly increase implementation of efficiency?

Increased education and awareness programs by governments, utilities, and community groups State tax credits for energy efficiency in addition to renewable energy - Federal tax deductions exist, but nothing from the state

Low/no interest financing - Interest rate buy downs or utility/DSM revolving fund - special purpose revenue bonds

Allow the state agencies to capture the benefits of energy efficiency projects - Preserve electrical budgets - Allow agencies to capture the rebate

ENERGY [ • . • • • • • W ; I 1 C

ritSi-"-:

The top 3 energy efficient measures you should implement in

your home

•

I Install a Solar Water Heater mji.?f.?

Most cost effective way to significantly reduce your electric usage 35% State tax credit 30% Federal tax credit $1,000 HECO rebate Pay As You Save

ENERGY [ • . • • ' • 'W iP»» '

VKESS^:

Use Compact fluorescent

Lamps 10,000 hour average life 75% less energy than incandescent

GE/HECO promotion Less heat

Use •^"^'ffC^

Appliances

ENERGY-STAR

ENERGY

Look for Energy Star on: - Refrigerators/Freezers -Washer/Dryers -A/C

- Dishwashers -Ceiling Fans

HECO rebates available

I Commercial and Industrial energy efficiency game plan

1. Commissioning and studies 2. Lighting Retrofitting 3. Energy Management Systems 4. Variable Frequency Drives / Pumps /

Motors /

5. HVAC Retrofits

Chan courtesy of Dr. Sam Rashkin EPA Energy Star PTCigram

Focus on sizing, operations and control

^ENERGY

Top measures for commercial and industrial facilities

Lighting

Variable Frequency Drives and Motors HVAC systems Energy Management Systems and Controls

Water Heating

Refrigeration

»M») V ; -^:'.

ENERGY

Wf^fJT^

"The Most Expensive Thing We Can Do Is Nothing"

We are all responsible for the solutions

ENERGY

One GREAT Reason Cm |r»At n«viii Khr ILT tincyr JnddMntt t*vn a r t t m mich ibvut •w x r t If n M i n i n H I wnlof t l v •*•>« • • • U l n n a M • U m .

AE It «• know thu Hti«r m ntiTtt«ii •fnoMia.i W fttdtfft, i r f t i n i «* l«vl dvn lAirgy F» VYVT Idbattt (kWh) rvw H« H « I , ^^ ndtica t . l tb l . t tCvMnOta iMi (CO]) rmni'4»in4 •>• ••nKi lUiMf haii Pl4*JCki| COj 1 4 ^ rqi4 |llb«l ,finHP9 intf kl lpf cur H l t grMHI

OiH kUBmB licH mar nd iMrT, •*< muc^ bul in IOO* Ihi WTiiu i f biiryy indiMtitii M V I I inugh t i t i i tt h*^i ts r.dgri «v^ H.T».0aOlbLlfC»ilT>ilmuMbi<^u<nknlMBnTi<lh*IWb*lng:

•.HMWHf l ,a04 Uf l frfltfn flu '•101

( H L I | 1,011,Mas tritaaii<»Htfna

oihaani 40,BTV tainm it M

n i j m > i i i m w n 4 n • ' i^lr • " • • • I i v w ^ (M K iU isa i i t i M V * Ikthk Wi4,Mhalf ttrOKIanHn • • [ • tu ra . I'w«>«n<

1111*11 (tf !hi Diftrgr Ln4i4rt« t tvn.

For More Information:

Brian Kealoha Energy Industries

The Evolution of Energy

brian.kealohaigienerqy-industries.cofn

www.enerqv-industries.corn

(808)839-7300x106

Cvataai Mlww fciti i t i r tm».Tt«a«i i« i<T I B J M U I M J

10

http://www.enerqv-industries.corn

FUTURE FUELS

And C02 Sequestration

Oil: The Main Issue

Most energy uses do not require oil Transportation does require oil By 2030, demand will exceed supply by 10 billion bbl/yr Source: Royal Dutch Shell

Chevron's Predictions

Millions of bbis/day

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

The impact of unconventional petroleum

By 2025, 2 billion bbls/year will come from tar sands and oil shale. The Increase in C02 over conventional oil will be 2 gigatons per year. Gas-to-liquids will yield 700 million bbls/a with an increase over conventional oil of 350 million tons/a of C02 All the U.S. coal-fired plants currently produce 2.4 gigatons of C02

Figure 48. World Coal Consumption by Region, 1980-2030

Billion Short Tons

10-

8-

6-

4 -

2-

History

' • ^ j •'

' • • ' . " " " '

'-''-.,'

• ' i ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ; _ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

• ' * • • .

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ B * * ^ ^ * ^ ^ ^ ^

. . . I - ' . - ' ^ : '

Projectiohs^-i, - .j'.. •

•'So&M Tbtal^î i iS^^

y ^ ' ^ ^ y . ' : i £ ^ ^ ^ ''J>^^V^^'':-^^--V

^^*<ôn'-OECp'v,.; '• :.

1 ^ ^ ^ ^ M ^ — ^ ^ ^ ^ * ^ ^ ^ ^ ' ' * "

1980 1990 2003 2010 2020 2030 Sources: History: Energy Information Administration (EIA),

International Enargy Annual 2003 (May-July 2005), web site www.eia.doe.gov/iea/. Projections; EIA, System for the Analysis of Global Energy MaHêts (2006).

Global Coal Consumption and C02 sequestration

• The lEA projects an annual increase in consumption of 5 billion tons of coal by 2030 for an annual increase of 18 billion tons/year of C02.

• Sequestration by injection into depleted oil fields, deep brine formations, coal mines, even deep ocean, and BIOLOGY

http://www.eia.doe.gov/iea/

Forests

Trees consume C02 and store carbon. How many trees are needed to offset the C02 generated by unconventional oil production and increased coal consumption by 2030? Best estimates are 50 trees per ton of 002 removal per year. At an average annual increase of 002 of 8.5 gigatons/a over the current 30 gigatons/a, how many trees do we need to plant to stabilize emissions? We would need 13,000 trees per second to be planted, and, by year 2030,19 billion acres of new forest would have been planted. About 4x land area ofthe U.S.

Biomass Fuels

Ethanol can be produced from biomass of most origins, green waste, waste paper, switchgrass, sugarcane, etc. Fermentation gives back half the carbon as C02 when ethanol is generated. No. and So. Dakota covered in switchgrass would be needed to absorb a net gigaton of C02 per year.

Biodiesel

High energy density fuel, acceptable in current diesel engines, blended or not, and compatible with fuel distribution infrastmcture with negligible disruption. Meets CAA standards with no sulfur, small particulate exhaust content, lower CO. Can be generated from vegetable oils, animal fats at about $2.60/gal. Most productive land plant is the oil palm, about 5X the best seed crop per acre in oil production. For Hawaii, ground transportation fuel alone would require all of Oahu and Kauai to be covered in oil palm.

BIOFUEL

Biodiesel (rape)

Ethanol (wheat straw)

Ethanol (wheat)

Electricity (miscanthus)

Ethanol (beet)

Biodiesel (MICROALGAE)

Biodiesel + Biogas (MICROALGAE)

Energy production from microalgae

cultivated biofuels.^ "Gross energy

Gross

40.3

24.2

61.1

66.7

117.2

2,495

3.371

Net

22.7

24-9

32.8

48.5

59.1

927

2.637

Relative

1.0

1.0

1.4

2.1

2.6

40.8

116.1

^ compared to representative

" is totai energy produced per

hectare per annum. "Net energy" takes into account th<

efficiency of the production process. "Relative energy"

J energy

compares

What Can Government Do?

Revenue-neutral tax on gas guzzlers Mandate energy retrofit of gov't bidgs Mandate net metering - 100%! Require solar water heating on all new construction. Tax gasoline but make it revenue neutral so that bus riders can save on their Income taxes

M^^B

IHB HI ^KSS^SSh^Kk

^^^^KWrgrHSfi^BlBi

WM

m

1 K B E ^ I ^

H ^R

m m

1 ^ ^ i ^ d

m ;^p

^m

w 4 glfilfggjl

1

^ ^ H

1 HiJ^rar

i

Panel —Incorporating Climate Change Into the IRP Process

How Does the State Government Piay a Role?

Dr. John Tantlinger Energy Planning and Policy Branch Manager State of Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism Strategic Industries Division httD://www.hawaH.QQv/dbedt/lnfo/enerav



Advisory Group Technical Session Qimate Change/Global Warming

State Capitol Auditorium June 8, 2007

Panel —Incorporating Climate Change into the IRP Process

How Does the State Government Play a Roie?

Dr. John Tantlinger Energy Planning and Policy Branch Manager State of Hawaii Department <^ Business, Economic Development & Tourism Strategic Industries Division http ://www. ha wall.Qov/dbedt/l nfo/enerqy



Advisory Group Technical Session Climate Change/Global Warming

State Capitol Auditorium June 8, 2007

http://www.hawaH.QQv/dbedt/lnfo/enerav

state Energy Objectives § 2 2 6 - 1 8 , Hawa i i Revised S ta tu tes . Ob jec t i ves and pol ic ies f o r

fac i l i t y systems—energy, (a) Planning for the State's racility systems with regard to energy shall be directed toward the achievement of the following objectives, giving due consideration to all:

(1) Dependable, effident, and economical statewide energy systems capable of supporting the needs of the people;

(2) Increased energy self-sufficiency where the ratio of indigenous to imported energy use is Increased;

(3) Greater energy security in the face of threats to Hawaii's energy supplies and systems; and

(4) Reduction, avoidance, or sequestration of greenhouse gas emissions f rom energy supply and use.

State Energy Policies Chapter 226-18 (b) and (c) (paraphrased)

(b) Ensure the prcwtdon ot adequate, reasonabt^ priced, and dependable energy services to accommodate demand. (c) To further achieve the enogy otjecthes, It shall be the policy of this State to:

(1) Support research and devetopment and promote use of renewable energy sources; (2) Ensure combination of enstgy suppDes and energy-saving systems Is suffident to support demands of growth; (3) Base dedsions of least-cost supply-side and demand-side energy resource optUrs on a comparison of

total costs and benefits. Least cost determined tiy quanbtattve and qualltattve acounttng of long-tenn, direct and Indirect economic, environmental, sodal, cultural, and puUc heald) costs and tieneflts;

(4) Pnynoteallcost-effectlveconservattonof power and fuel supplies through: (A) Deudcpnent of cost-efrealvedem«iid-(lrKr[Un*0cment programs; (B) BluarUan; ind ( Q MopUonof cnern-fffident pncUcsandtechnologla;

(5) Ensure If new supply-sKte resounzes are needed, that the least-cost energy s u p i ^ option and nrtaxlmlzatlon of efficient technotogbes Is used;

(6) Support ROaO of energy effidency, load management, and other DSM; (7] Promote alternate fuels artd er^agy efficiency tiy encouraging d»verstftcat)on of tiznsportattan modes and

infrastructure;

(8) Support actions that reduce, avoid, or sequester greenhouse gases In utility, transportation, and industrial sector applications; and

(9) Support actions that reduce, avoid, or sequester Hawaii's greenhouse gas emissions through agriculture and forestry initiatives.

Energy for Tomorrow IRP-related 2006 Energy Laws

Sending the Right Signals to the Market for Electricity

Renewable Energy Tax Credits Increased De-link payments for renewable energy from oil Increase energy efficiency investments via Public Benefits Fund Share risk for oil purchases between utilities and ratepayers (the "energy cost adjustment clause" issue)

2006 Energy for Tomorrow Package Estimated Benefits by 2020

Displace 110 million barrels of crude oil

Retain $6.3 billion in Hav\/aii's economy

Eliminate 49 mill ion tons of C02

Result in 65,700 job-years of employment

Equivalent to stopping all flows of oil into the state for 2 years between now and 2020

Panel —Incorporating Climate Change into the IRP Process

How Does the State 'S'it^QNGovernment Play a Role?

i^AHALO!

Presentation by tnvitatJon of:


Advisory Group Technical Session Qimate Change/Giobal Warming

State Capitol Auditorium

June 8, 2007

'Mfoaa CsfloDcag ®L?1iIlo0[fQ©g ( ^ m

twwwaotxycnncQmi

Projects - Green Power Pricing - Renewable Energy

Certificate - Feeid in Tariff

Education - Consumer outrea

utility - Power purchase

agreements - Interconnections

Corporate

Transparency

ch Inve sstment

Projects Companies

• lTYriai iRina5iqi i in ingswrOT<B^*™>'™^T^^ [WhaWidsTqgrtiJn^

G r e e n GJnl Green Power ^^" ^^^"^ ^^r^ program

GREEN PRICING - $3 for 25% - $6 for 50% -•$12fori00%

Fund Renewable Energy in community

•Money is used to Invest In purchasing green energy atTeal power cost •Give valuo to project developers for green

http://www.seattle.gov/llqht/qreen/qreenpower/

•Money is used to Install renewable systehfis •Projects become demonstrations •Lead the way for mass adoption

te^newa

A REC, Green Tag or Tradable Renewable Certificate. Sold as a separate cornmodity - Gifts

Offset Home Electricity, Car Travel, Air Travel This conference? The creation ofthis presentation

2,796 kWh renewable energy

http://www.seattle.gov/llqht/qreen/qreenpower/

" • - , • • ' / •

A t l a n t i c C i t y E l e c t r i c (virtually same size as HECO)

ClcanPowor Product Supplier Componics Nnme Resource

Additional Percent of Pfke per • Monthly Additionni Kilowatt Eicclrluty Monthly Hour • Usnge Cost"

j - ' . - 100%-,. . ; l , 'J9.10 • ll'.<--J

i^-WKlJw4w^Hl^.^^-^V-''_^^ J^-,lfe--,•>:.-; . - V y ^

Example: 10 Megawatt Solar Prialect at $0.13/kWh = $2.3 Million With a $0.013 Green Power Adders $236.000 or 10% increase

Obligation of a utility to purchase electricity generated by renewable energy procJucers for a.guaranteed period of time.. ., ^

Austria. Brazil. France. Germany. Greece. Italy. Ontario. Portugal. Spain

300

3ta

KD-

ISO

WO

B

D

loocmocwoB pioenm

(2*00 I JkW

wwriwi rrw-m t -H

WOOORopnop

^ . » .M . • . W rrtt tMo m i i sn IOU I M * IOM IOOO in r i m IMO i MOI JCKQ ItXD lOM

^^^^a&asSSBSH^gS^ass svsxsS^m

What 3j;^3can'UtJi "'^' ^DoirS?

^^^^m^^mm^Wmmi Renewable power recognition - Commercials are fun but what aboutfadts?

-Clean up misconceptions

-Ge t the public involved

Current Process • 11 Page Non-Utility

Generator • 93 Page Power Point • 2 Year Cycle

- Investment tax credit year x year

- Land lease Issues - Offering lower than ennq

)lded avoided cost

Standardized "Guide to a PPA" - Step by step needs - Developer can prepare

documents

i f ^ m d ^ izesirnte rconi ifi.ecti onfe

Do we really need to reinvent the wheel? - Cost

• $30,000 - $75,000

Standardize • Type of renewable •Size of system

CSP system owned by Florida Power and Light, 350 MW purchased by San Diego Gas and Electric.

•Wincj system owned by Florida Power and Light, 280 MW purchased by Austin Energy.

Renewable H A W A I I

i " S C O .'. U f • , ' C l •. H •

Spain: Currently constructing 4 CSP proiects fbr 1 GW ail

funded by utilities

aack to Home

Renewable Hawaii - What's New

RHI Rirau»r» PiBtw.1 PTCPOJ BU Bwut^U PiBW.1 Prcpeaii? RHI Requests PtaeQ Prooosats (9.t)</Q31 Study e\-aluates Potendal Wind Farm sites [S/22/03) RHI Requests Ptoied PtooosaK t & ^ 2 m i HECQ AiBKHTCCS Fqmiatiqi ol RHI 11(3^03)

"Utilities invesi in projects to capture

green certificates and hedge fluctuations in

fuel'

^^^m RwTTaflkiras^fiTlTingsllSIBBJIM

Hawaii's unique grid -Late day peak -Seasonality

• Travel seasons

- Humidity and wet bulb^

What renevvable options work the best? - Which ones are bad for Hawaii's grid -Tell us

> ^ \ p ' t ; r • •.t^ie.'''&-f^.

Whai [ UtI llti es Dol rigr ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ i i

Website for each utility - Keyword: "buy green power"

Investor owned utilities

Larger utilities targets - Leadership role

jRelevant^ Somewhat Relevant JNotlRelevantl

BUaA

unrwcki s w e l l Cm Buy Gra«nT )»u iU< i i i a i - ' i t A t f r -HowIutllitiesTcanTKjvygfeen

power.

PicMk ilm .iM f •Biin; rompniri t n r M B u GgTunor. Jra> ti.unii..i -r.iiHui _ i r t i i a i i onHHTi a o r r M g i m ' G r M n u ^ u r c u H n s i wn Cr*. scyw i tw i Powai c<t f Greeni Dr^mTeventl

-Oi i iMI»< ineCarMi f !)SuT H*it mioPowacCiUura' i i i teuat i i i c« i i v iw i *«am< M i l Powar I* M BonQtit tnpn I>m..

Kt[An.-\»£TcttJ«i|)}E«atJ>.tn.Gr>">P»w^ _ WM t j w t i m UÂar i nnv Gf««n P o w i l MJfflVBriihi powai k i ]M.*M»1U n m •OU t tmt tum S«a**n U n G t a n Povni !M IM t i t t h i piMi«f fn :M K l IME w R n o r i .cmdi BIT Jk/H u

rsODMWfcofftracBfoTl feoncentra^rSolarJKoweri

tct i>4it i tai iugraan p M _ * b U i D ' m a u Q r a a n ^ M n n - *

j i ! 9 i :

htlpJ/leimh poe n n i i t f q i » t Y , r W ^ T r t ' t w * < " " " ^ ' ™ " r * ° ° - V P » y f l

11 nan'cialiim pact J Ke'venuS] DcBProfigTDp^

R a i H l i m i a l I F P L I Sun«h inB E n t r g y F A Q » _ Dnc* e u a t a m n i ^ n up Tor g r a e n p o v w r prickig. w l Ihey t t l b v y p o w a r t m n Fn.? Y u . m . w i l t l M I t l * i i K t n : i y »r«vU*r....

www. fp l C0m'f8Si<J«rTtial /»i iCtf ic '6unshJne_«nBrf jy_(aq9.«hnnl - 4 5 k - (

i p p f l T t n Y M f P o w e r P lan I S i te R a n 2007-2016 P«B« 1. T M Y t i r P w M r Ptinl S I * nan 7007-3010 SuMnfltd T r _ iThb p*g* k kit intlonil ir l«n Mank.) P B 9 « 3. FtorUa P(mr«r t Light Cenvany I Tibia of Co i t t aA

integrated Resource Plan w w w fp( com/BbouUtan_y««t /p( r t 'pJan pdf - 2007-04-18 • Tex: V e r s i o n

[pp f l S«p( . 0 5 I ... AccauiTt ttian Updau AccvunI hfo (h Hie g reen Qukk L h t i . . . FPt. Energy Kev N e w s l e t t e r Power t Lghl Campeny PO Box ... Whttt row Buy A Cir* ts Shert Bear Yeu O l v i .

www. fp j co [n 'n«w*/nBW3_and_not«s /pdt 'en»4y5n(w2006 pdf - 2006-11-02 - T e a Vara ion

P u f C h a i I n o Ads iso f - Try aa lon yau buy . . i r t dknnad. igm mitpnl d e c r t i M i n r mere than p o w e r [ E d U C a t l O n l • e - . Th* tedioabgy eaet iT4cra[)roca««ot« ts C A M M I I rad. g reen , and bbe L £ O r = ~ WWW fp(.cotTi/bu9in«ss/8ffnng6/enBrgy_a(J'^sor/PA__43.html - 14K - C a c h e d

F P L Group a n d C o n i l B l l a l i o n Ena rgy l o M a n w . Craa i ino Na t i ond€^

. . market aaaedtiaa r«n*wat)i* anargy c f t d b ind green lagt «rTtcih*V — b p u b e U a i y , Fbrtdi Power iUgntCampeny._ s t a n o r t t t t obuy airy t eeu ruaa - . • i f i m i f i c o r n f n e w i ' 2 0 0 5 ' c o m a n t 5 . D 5 2 6 6 s h i m l - SSk - Cached

hmpi/JIplOoogle.fFt.comâ rcf lTq>t iuyir«wTioMi&Una xÔUuC .yO I ia- U Hti]<_rade«B n aat<put-»rt_(io_(lUldaM<4pl_r*0algn_ca a nUpmxyaytolia a l - f p<_red»tion_cia W

http://www.fpl

http://www.fpj

Bui lder S Buyer

... Lcam About CPP. Oenand BUdlng Pn>gnta OH Bt i la ra i S e k t i t b n . I .er^ Power kilarnjptMa PrDgiaina I 4 S P . - . I'nanaSeiantlSeviigi.'BuIldvaiaSayeff

[PDf] Pf o o r a m Tit le; ... andapplanoea. Triatnedie buy w l a b e b e r u n _ etudlaa, tne F i n Vour P< wabale ani] ttia * ._ davtkip ts promote tti« G reen SuHIng nUatbe). A a a e d i l l a n t . . . mWrdc nlyrt 1,1:7 W117C-MEF-*n 0-A£42-AFEeEZ93TDFSWSCE2»4S;ata<i

JFIexWoUrJpoweH feci ucatlonalTm?terla Isl

EarUiDay ... Racycmg and Waatt Pravintiea VVaata. ' g r e e n ' pgrcfiaatig. r t c y c i i g and v/aat* , mora than 4 1 . . . iTe a lu re r'a rcti N a'a a r-ji ,M (11

. w u c t i hdudaa pravtnban. reuai

.aneugti energy to pravide p o w f IsltjillloStcWhTsLippileS f romlWI riHITCS i3?ancirothe rit=

p T.yoTa I lU powe u's u ppi ieci Enargy Centor 'e Claes Schedule . - Aaa«Ming Ui* Ec«nefnica e( O raen BuUng and Energy ETfldincy.._ tneBiurement, ACOC p o w e r , genantora, mtFtm, t n r u f o r m a n » about liew buy and operate kichen _. ^CFVIr .erT^crr l t rC^taScf i td i j Ia lapctTSORT-MOftC'CTACOntER

Energy C e n l e r e Claae Sct iedule ... ACCA Uenuel D - Dud Dae«n. Thta _ AOTAC, P r u a n t a r SCC P o w e r Praductlon Training, Free, See — Aaeeaakig the EconofTlca ot Green DuUIng and Energy e inckncy. Oeaa ...

^Cq/En-rgvCenterCkHSchedule. aafHTSORT-N&ORO-ALL

tmpjttfttm ica conV_S*aichTidvanca(lS*erct^ArecPerP«g*>iDKae_q'i4lfbuy »lirtan*p<wimai«nSaaSaan*Tof^lO-. - j ^ - ' •

iareen1mjllcling!D?sign

FJnaricialTlrn^S^ITRevenuel QpTRrofigtOpl

Baiaasflig«fliiT?tf?MitirF'^ftw»»^^

O n e r g y / P S l O f fa rB C u t t o m e f ^ ' G r e a n P o w a r * O p t i o n a

... EnerTy, a C inergy compai ry , h a t recarv«d app rove l f r o tn Ind iane

CO alloii* i t * c u s t o m e r ! the opt ion to b u y ' B t v e n p o a r a r * gc fMra tod

- 6k

SustmnereTcarffBuylGreen'i Power!

c i n o r g y / P S I T o O f f a r C o s t o m c r ^ ' G r e e n P o w a r ' O p b o n a

... 20OL- PSI Eneryy , a a n o r g y co inpanv , t odey esked (nd ie f i

t » O F l T h e w o r l d b a l o n g i t o o u r e h i l d r a n . W i t h C o G r a a n P o w f a ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

.. . Gay^nd th is m i n i m u m , you Can p u n i i e M addi t ional 100 k*(h b l o d j G r e e n l R O W e f J R r O g r a m ^

13.50 e m o n t h . All you heve to d o i i d e o d e hot* m a n y blodcc you winTTO'BIIV' •••

Eclucatl onal t RleceTS nl Rrogrami

[PDF] G o G r e e n P o w e r

. . . Beyond this m i n i m u m , you can purchaae eddit ional lOOkW

I I . S O e mon th . All you have t o do ia dec ide t iow n u n y blocfci

[ M c e r e t u l a r rom iirwnw.duke-Bnafay.oorTt/pdf» 3

R e n e w a b l e E n e r g y • D u k e E n e r g y - H a n t a h a l a A r « a

... Duke Enerov - Nantahala A rea of fara t w o producta ur>der the NC . n3»>

NC O r e e n P o * a r • Thia product al lowa cuc tomcra t o b u y one o r m o f J | y r ^ ^ P ^ ° Q * ' ^ ^ " ° ' ^ ^ l " f l l

- 13k

nnpJAvww duke-<(ie[yv.caTAea(tiMaraul.aap f-1 n'a'nc lai 11 mip35t!yRevenue1

8

Search ResuKs (1-20 of 100

g) H=g) > IIECO prm.li \i>t EhERGr sTAfftit^^.aa. Moftgage pfogram for HBCOp~.ni.u,.ErjERCTTSTAM,«=ns.B-:...»u,«.„h.r.^r^.n^hv«„ g n c r g y S t a r A p p l l a n c o s t n i ™il*»iL rnj *e» wJibJai 13 H '.fl ~~r.—!

(no dMMpio'it I j n tTsA l i i ] [ n a i t o a m l j U a l l ' l U K f

^^ MEpIp CaniiWff |.;nf t • Mw WM (no 4itcri((ion) l u l l nsdiltd. (no dj(* Hiliib(a| | 4 46 Kfl

F2002lHEgCO!Ngwslettef1

>20Q0iMECOfNew3letter

g | HECO > HECQ III Ptf j m P i w l w i u c P[w,ti >1 l ' m y * t a x a i i iv«,o

FOR IIAAEDIATE RELEASE FOU lUMnOIATIE FIEIEASE Pirtt R o v « i4).r7Fa D n t L i n T M ^ d - (no M t riv' ibtaj I « 5'J KB

(ne ihKnttion) L H i r ^ a a d ( n e U a i M i i t t e l i r i l *&

p l l l l l i i i i imi i i i i i i i i i i i i i l i i i i i i i i i i in i ' i " i i iaar r i i i l i m i i i i i i i M a i ml n a m i i i i i i i i rtijccrvn' > i i * i yL / ]M iW7 i£<^ .a i »na . i m w a i c • • w u i M t i . r « w j i f M**M47IcaMall»in«lllO*UlOg.MHI[>ieeiULT.aET_MEW*|>*pa1HF» » • »3*ifewaii i«i»i im)»iite»îif i i_«n*iB».n-i iaiMii i | iîM.»»,aM.tnCi*it«t I n j i i f^ iMti i i i t i i 111 11 pann i i i i r i i i i i r i * I i J i i n i ai i in

BSSlKWiR-VifoHHECOl

K007iHECOlNewsietteij

f:ina'nc[allimp'act:iiêven!!i5 0CTProntsTDownT2%'

l y e n u e l

3BB3BâgWatfMWaiBgM!ttBBt>i.^^

IP^mrf^^

Support Energy Efficiency

Support Renewable Energy - Build a green power program

• Buy green power at market rate

- Support complimentary renewable technologies

- Educate the public and professionals

Be transparent

http://prm.li

http://p~.ni

Attachment 5

Written comments received from the public

Public Meeting on Climate Change <& 6lobat Warming June 8, 2007

COMMENTS

Comments about today's technical session are welcomed. I f desired, you may submit your comment on this form. Please use additional pages as needed.

t U c ^ H ^ f) 1/141, / n £ ^iuA<:t3-'ucc-rK^

% ' ^ i i £ J ^^^^'^^^'' c T l ( ' ^ . - M

i^to^^

(Optional)

Nome: Ph # :

Address:

Email:

Please leave your completed comment form at the registration desk or mail to HECO IRP Division, PO Box 2750 (WA4-yP), Honolulu H I 96840-0001

by June 15, 2007.

Public Meeting on Climate Change <& Global Warming June 8, 2007

COMMENTS

Comments about today's technical session are welcomed. I f desired, you may submit your comment on this form. Please use additional pages as needed.

o-^

(Optional) -v ^ ^

Nome: \lSfAplSkui \ .Cj^/n^yOl^ . Ph # :

Address: S H-3 QaaS£/rv S T ^ ^ iT J ^ - ^ c J . . D , ^ ?C,g U3

Email: (L.a^tmQ.^L^ WxL)CLLU.Li.x^ • ^

Please leave your completed comment form at the registration desk or mail to HECO IRP Division, PO Box 2750 (WA4-yP), Honolulu H I 96840-0001

by June 15, 2007.

file:///lSfAplSkui

Attachment 6

Transcript of the technical session

HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC COiVIPANY, I N C . INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLANNING

ADVISORY GROUP TECHNICAL SESSION CLIMATE CHANGE/GLOBAL WARMING

FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 2007

KEYWORD INDEX

CARNAZZO COURT REPORTING COMPANY, LTD (808) 532-0222

i353 [2] 1:24 234:18

$

Tm 1] 135:16 02

Ml 131:18 $105

?r" 11] 207:23 $236,000 f1] 211:10 $3 P l 97:4 207:21 $30 PJ 131:18 135:16 227:18 $40 [1] 162:20 $5 M] 97:5 $57 [1] 209:12 $9.10 [1] 210:19

nother [11180:1

n r s — [1] 67:11

T [13] 14:9 23:7 40:8 45:6 45:9 45:11 47:18 48:5 4B:20 71.8 119.16 235:1 235:21 1.000 [1] 135:18 1.1 [2] 196:21 222:13 1.3 [21210:18 211:6 1.5 [1] 39:13 10 12119:15 88:4 04:25 122:25 126:21 i42:3 160:12 164:9 171:23 210:22 211:10 211:15 10,000 [2140:19 135:17 100 [6] 2;14 77:7 122:25 142:20 186:20 207:23 100,000 [11125:21 10:15 [1] 66:11 10:16 [11 66:14 10:30 [2166:12 66:15 11 [21 14:25 88:4 11-page [1] 2^4:5 115 [112:15 115.000 [1] 126:14 11:51 [ l j 113:24

p ) 14:24 14:25 201:9

[1] 126:5 123.000 [11 127:4 125 [1] 142:1 125,000

^ l E C O IRP Technical Session; 6 / ^ 9 J: lT lB; ig 40:15 40:21 1 144:6160:35151:13161:141

128

[31210:23 211:1 211:7 13,000 [1] 163:20 1300 [IJ 16:21 13 / :i]2:17

36:25 205:7 205:16 206:7

[11 15

33:5 .6

[11 2.18 15 Bl $:2 8:13 17:1 28:8 68:5 69:21 98

114:9 211:4 15-foot [1] 47:2 159 [11 2:19 15th [2137:18 53:18 16.3

[3] 3:25 74:13 149:13 18 [31 39:16 144:1 162:20

[1)126:7 188

1880 [2143:6 43:16 1880s

far [2] 44:17 44.18 19

38:22 1^57/1958 [1112:5 1976 [1] 119:15 1979

[11 8:2 1900 [181 11:35 14:25 28:14 30:12 30:15 32:14 32:18 34:2 63:16 88:26 89:1 01:8 92:9 92:17 92:21 93:7 93:21 189:13 1990'8

230:24 i90s

[3] 14:841:1241:16 1993 [1] 8:8 1994 [1] 201:6 1995 [1115:1 1997 [1] 30:11 1998 [1] 201:6 1:00 [1] 113:24 1st [11 88:24

[131 17:7 17:8 39:14 67:16 120:11

- .•57T2D-169:19 218:8 218:9 2.3 [1] 210:24 20 [20] 14:18 46:15 47:17 94:22 94:25 95:7 120:5 123:23 142:S 142:24 149: 4 156:13 164.9 171:10 171:23 172:9 185:13 203:8 204:1215:24 200 [1] 14:20 2001 [5] 44:18 44:18 87:13 87:25 119:18 2002 [31 42:7 202:8 202:18

)03 [1] 162:2 2005 [111 28-.15 32:15 32:18 34:1 41.14 41: 16 41:19 53:19 156:7 160:18 216:19 2006 [4] 203:25 204:6 204:16 210:4 2007 [7] 1:15 38:22 234:7 235:2 235:4 235; 10 235:12 2009 [3121:21 71:4 80:1 2010 [1] 95:8 2012 [4] 121:4 121:5 121:13 189:22 2013 [1] 122:22 2015 [21121:6122:22 2016 [1] 121:13 2017 [1] 120:14 2020 [9] 22:22 91:8 94:22 123:16 123:20 123:25 172:9189:13 204:14 2023 [1] 66:24 2025 [2199:11 161:13 203-1582 [1] 235:16 2030 [4] 160:11 160:18 162:3 163:18 205 [1] 2:24 2050 [1] 19:7 20th [2] 39:11 39:23 2100 [3] 19:4 19:15 45:2 22 [1] 80:6 226 [15] 68:22 91:7 189:3 169:7 189:10 190:17 190:21 101:7 191:22 191:24 193:7 196:6 219:23 230:15 230:21 226-18(a [1] 202:9 231 [1] 2:25 234 [1] 235:21 24 [21117:16 169:18 24-hour-a-day [1] 123:9 24-ounce [2] 140:16 140:17 247 [11126:19 25 [9] 123:20 142:25 156:1 162:2 163:3 163:21 182:7183:12 207:21 25,000 [2] 123:12 169:16 250 I I ] 161:18 26 [2] 2:5 152:18 26.6

{\] 33:15 266 11 230:3 ^i

[1] 25:3 28 [1] 33:10 280 [11216:9 2:46 [1] 187:24

3 \ [9] 2:2 39:11 39:21 40:13 40:15 40: 24 57:16 160:1 163:9 3.0 [1] 39:20 3.1 [11140:23 3.4 [3] 39:18 39:20 39:21 30 [13] 5:2 9:4 9:6 119:23 120:5 120:17 141:12 160:14 160:16 162:17 165:13 174:21 176:6 30.1

[1] 179:19 30th [1] 98:4

[1] 99:8

22:8 125:3 S [2122:22120:15

1111:16 ^ -[1] 125:22 354 [11 215:25

[1] 39:7 377,000 [1] 126:2 38 [2] 2:7 128:24 3:00 [1] 187:25

m 17:9 57:16 57:23 95:13 125:23 141:18 149:8 4.18 [1] 77:4 4.2 [1] 33:12 4.42 [1] 125:8 4.6 [1] 125:24 40 [2] 126:20 141:19 45 [1] 126:20 4:12 [2] 233:3 235:11

[111 44:1 57:16 96:9 121:12 122:24 160:23 162:4 162:4 163:19 169:19 171:16 5,000 [1] 178:25 50 [12] 2:8 19:8 67:21 123:15 123:18 126:6 127:6 131:19 141:8 141:10 142:18 149:2 50,000 [1] 123:16

5U4ays-to-save-the-p)anet [11114:23 500,000 [1] 222:13 50kw [1] 215:11 54 [1] 128:23 543-7372 [11235:16

[11 83:5 550 f2] 10:12 56:12

[1] 39:1 Sth [1] 76:24

• ^ CO IRP Technical Session; 6/8i

-m [1] 76:25

Adequately [4)34:14 203:3 204:18 222:12 Adieu [I ] 68:11 Administration [ I I ] 4:6 14:9 14:10 16:6 20:5 21:11 61:2 61:21 62:4 94:3 160:3 Administration's [1] 204:5 Administrators [1] 197:15 Admission [1] 20:9 Admit [1) 175:7 Adopt [1)177:10 Adopted [4] 196:2 200:6 202:3 202:16 Adopt ing [1)217:12 Adoption [1)78:25 Ads [2] 213:3 213:3 AdutU [1] 88:6 Advance [4] 92:24 203:15 204:21 204:25 Advanced [1)133:7 Advancement [1] 101:6 Advances [3)25:12 55:20 120:13 Advantage [2) 20:16 85:18 Advise [1] 232:8 Advised [1] 90:11 Advisor (2) 27:23 72:9 Advisory [12)1:8 3:8 6:13 6:21 28:3 38:13 90: 26 204:25 232:6 232:17 235:3 236:0 AHvocStO [7) 6:21 27:8 73:16 74:1 74:3 201:17 230:9 A d v o c a t e ' s [1] 109:9 Advocated [2] 93:10 200:8 Advocating [1] 173:20 AEP [1] 22:4 Aerodynamic [1] 179:22 Aerographic [2] 52:13 52:17 Aerosols [1)15:10 AES [1] 122:12 Aesthaticaliy [1] 108:9 Aesthetics [2)108:12 108:14 Affect [15) 50:18 50:22 59:10 59:14 105:19 106:11 117:4 148:20 153:23 154:14 168:17 187:5 230:12 230:14 231:3 Affected [11 54:9 AffecUng [1] 100:9 Affective 111154:1 Affects [1] 230:7 Afford [2149:21 162:22 Afraid [2135:10134:18 Afternoon [18) 7:2 18:25 96:8 114:1 114:2 114:

[8] 40:15 40:24 44:1 45:4 57:16 57: 23 05:11 131:19

7 !f 60 [9] 11:17 77:6 63:5 123:14 126:9 126; 10162:8162:17 211:24 60,000 [1] 123:15 62,000 [1] 126:13 63-Inch m 169:8

[1] 19:7 68 [1] 2:9 69 [1)120:12

T 3143:24141:1 144:6 \T-9r-' [2] 119:15 156:15 700 [1] 161:17 705 j l ^ 235:2

[1] 128:21 75 [3119:4 19:4 144:5

[1]2:10

^ [9] 1:15 2:3 80:6 146:24 234:7 236:2 235:4 235:10 23$:12 80 [41119:15126:6142:8 156:15 ri] 145:23 300,000 (11125:25 808 [21235:16 235:16 820

m 185:19

[112:11 67,000 . J 126:8

[2] 125:6 125:18 886 [1] 235:2 8:34 [5] 1:15 234:7 235:5 235:10 235:11

^ 0 [4)2:13 124:21 125:1 156:16 93-page [1] i l4 :5 98 [1)124:23 99 [1]71;6 99.8 [1] 156:18

[51^35:6 235:6

[1) 235:6

A.m. [5] 1:15 66:14 113:24 235:5 235:10 AB [11 22:8 Abduct ion [11178:11 Abduct ions [1)149:14 Ability [6] 64:8 83:5 228:14 228:21 234:12 Able [22] 23:1 32:4 32:11 34:9 36:19 36: 20 45:24 62:15 63:11 104:24 123:23 132:20 137:22 144:16 164:7 177:2 183:7 183:20 204:24 209:9 220:12 229:4 Absent [11 200:15 Absolute [11 83:23 Absolutely j6] 78:1 79:17 83:8 143.23 147:1 204;

Absorb [3111:611:9166:4 Absorbing [1] 175:2 Abundant [2170:5116:9 Ac [1] 65:25 Accelerate [1] 171:18 Accelerating [1] 141:20 Accept [2178:19 80:20 Acceptance [1] 155:15 Accepts [1] 78:21 Access [2] 49:22 182:12 Acciden t [3] 77:25 86:2 147:9 Accommodate [4] 67:16 160:18 162:19 163:24 Accompl ish [2186:17 86:19 Accompiished [1] 203:2 According [4] 77:2 93-7 159:15 160:11 Account [7144:3 44:6 100:24 112:11 125:10 193:11 230:17 Accounts [1] 77:5 Accumulated [1] 64:23 Accumulating [2] 41:14 42:17 Accuracy [1] 36:14 Accurate

L2j:}2:24 148:13 Accuser [1] 170:9 Achieve [4)22:21 23:15 87:20 204:17 Achieved [21105:10 107:11 Achievement [1) 202:12 Achieving [1] 132:2 Acidification [2)100:9149:17 Acltnowiedge [9] 5:19 6:10 6:12 6:20 27:6 34:20 91 1 151:20 168:24 Acquire [1] 32:11 Acquisit ion [1] 36:13 Acre [2)65:24 71:6 Acres [3)71:5 71:5 71:6 Across-the-board [1) 62:9 Act [10] 23:6 79:6 79:6 100:12 109:7 112: 13 189:3 189:9 100:17 190:21 Acted [1] 189:23 Acting [1] 167:25 Action [29] 29:23 30:3 30:6 76:2 76:4 78:22 79:9 79:9 81:13 81:15 82:9 64:10 85: 14 86:19 88:18 91:15 101:2 102:5 150:15 153:1 153:9 154:4 164:5 164: 22156:25 183:10 200:25 202:1 202: 19 Actions [7] 82:11 138:12 154:2 154:7 155:19 156:22 201:24 Active (3)66:1114:17146:14 Actively [1] 221:18 Activities [10] 12:19 12:20 15:24 15:25 20:14 20:15 21:3 56:1179:21 102:7 Activity [5] 13:14 30:16 76:1 82:25 208:9 Actual [6] 36:21 05:1 131:23 149:24 159:18 165:15 Ad [4)146:25147:3 158:5 173:4 Adam [2] 25:6 98:21 Adapted [ I ] 143:1 Add [15) 14:8 45:12 53:5 57:18 81:22 81: 24 101:24 106:6 107:18 107:19 138: 12140:1177:13 187:3 211:8 Adding [2] 44:9 202:2 Addition [6] 34:15 132:7 132:10 134:1 196:9 222:25 Additional [12] 29:5 37:12 61:20 80:6 80:9 84: 12 85:1 207:16 207:18 208:23 211: 10 228:17 Additionallty [1)24:8 Address [ I I ] 3:21 21:4 22:6 103:25 105:4 105: 5 112:25 157:5 195:23 224:18 232:24 Addressed [6] 105:16 172:12 172:19 172:19 174: 3 174:11 174:18183:5 Addresses [2)190:22100:23 Addressing [3] 6:25 89:9 90:6 Adequate [2)99:13 228:4

10 «T:UH'5:12 115:13 146:24 173: 5 173:21 173:21 181:2 185:16 198: 13198:16 198:21 Afternoon's [1] 198:23 Age [2140:22199:24 Agencies [9] 27:16 134:14 134:24 168:17 199: 4 199:11 199:12 199:25 220:20 Agency [4] 72:10 162:1 197:14 207:7 Agency's [^29:14 200:10 Agenda [ q 4:8 4:9 4:15 5:8 6:22 Agents [11180:5 Ages [1178:2 Aggredsive [4)17:15 134:17 134:24 136:10 Aggressively [2136:5 80:15 Ago [17] 4:4 4:7 16:23 18:20 37:6 38:18 38:20 40:16 40:21 44:16 68:21 95:7 150:9 150:13 166:1 173:4 180:11 Agree

[13:24 61:6 61:17 87:14 186:13 9:14

Agreed [11206:6 Agreement [7] 53:10 141:8 208:22 214:2 215:1 215:12 235:12 Agreements [31215:18 228:6 228:12 Agrees [ir22:9 Agricul tural [7133:23 75:1 75:6 75:10 164:3 164: 19 167:6 Agriculture [3134:17 70:15 201:8 Ahead [12] 5:7 8:14 58:14 66:16 76:20 85: 19 86:12 86:24 05:15 99:17 116:6 173:22 Aid [11195:20 Alms [1 200:11 A n't

[27] 0:11 11:22 15:20 23:6 29:9 42: 15 67:1 77:24 81:4 96:8 07:5 08:7 107:8 116:16 124:14 125:22 120:13 138:7 138:23 142:4 142:4 142:17 146:23 169:4 169.6 209:5 209:19 Alr-condit ioner

198:7 . .Jr-condltioning [26] 65:4 65:12 6^14 77:9 61:4 96:8 115:15 115:16 116:23 116:13 122:8 123:10 124:14 125:22 127:7 129:13 135:19 136:7 136:23 142:2 142:9 169:4 169:6 169:11 160:15 209:5 Aircraft [3133:11 33:13 33:18 Airlinetf [11163:2 Airport [1146:3 Airports [1] 209:19 Aisles

168:9

lECO IRP Technical Session; 6/f [1] 17B:18 Albert [2] 34:22 37:24 Algae [17 104:21104:22104:24 115:4 165: 8 165:9 165:16 166:1 166:3 167:7 181:20 181:21 181:21 182:2 182:6 182:7182:12 Alien

3 149:14 178:10 Ive

[1 77:25 A located [1] 192:14 Allocation [2] 32:24 93:4 Al low [15] 27:17 43:11 48:22 50:9 50:10 97: 15 101:14 101:15 104:5 109:1 170:5 184:17 164:16 207:4 213:20 Al lowing [1 228:23 A lows rn 23:3 23:16 23:19 25:3 207:12 211: 21222:17 A im 116] 2:10 6:12 67:25 74:11 76:10 78: •5 78:17 S5:14101:20104:7 106:4 106:24 110:8110:14113:6 Almost 112] 23:9 25:4 42:8 45:3 45:13 66:8 116:4 109:19 125:25 162:4 162:7 184: 2 Aloha [5] 3:4 26:26 66:18 188:20 233:2 Alone [3)123:14 168:7165:4 Alpine

S 43:18 43:19 temative

S 70:11 80:20170:16 tematives

p i 70:24 72:18 156:23 Altogether

a 00:5 umlnum

[1] 176:20 Amazing [1] 48:3 Amazon [l]75:2 Ameliorate [2)39:5 61:6 America [1] 149:15 American [11150:10 Americans

[4) 148:18 148:19 149:12 178:10 Amount [41] 10:7 14:15 16:12 16:16 41:16 44: 4 59:16 62:25 74:8 74:12 74:13 80:0 85:3 66:13110:16110:18112:12 116:21 119:19 120:4120:7 121:19 129:14 130:24 131:22 132:9 135:21 137:3 137:5 162:21 177:5 179:23 181:12 193:19 196:18 196:20 196:21 208:3 210:17 222:9 227:12 Amounts [2)39:1 106:21 Analyses [11203:11 Analysis [44] 2:22 28:22 34:6 47:21 62:15 72: 19 74:11 74:15 74:20 76:7 77:14 115: 22 115:25 118:1 121:18 124:6 124:9 124:14 125:20 131:20 188:17 189:21 190:10190:11 190:15191:11 192:3 192:22 193:4 195:19 197:6 197:8 197:16 197:22 197:24 201:15 203:13 222:8 222:9 222:20 222:21 224:10 224:20 224:22 Analytic [21202:21221:25 Analyze [1] 200:10 Analyzed [1] 76:13 Anger

[1) 153:13 Angle [11139:12 Anheuser [IJ 66:8 Anheuser-Busch [1] 88:8 Animals [1] 148:14 Announcer [11 147:7 Annoys [1] 140:25 Annual [1] 159:19 Annually [1] 110:24 Answer [19] 50:14 68:4 83:11 100:3 104:9 106:4 106:12 106:24 112:15 168:4 192:20 195:16 219:19 220:12 220:23 221:3 225:14 228:4 228:25 Answered [1] 106:19 Answers (1]5:3 Antarctic [8] 39:2 42:8 42:11 42:16 42:19 43: 24 67:10 58:19 Antarctica [8] 39:4 40:2 42:13 42:16 42:17 42: 21 57:9 69:20 Anthropogenic [5] 12:22 15:3 15:14 15:25 18:13 Anticipate [3117.fl7'.23 5T.25 Anticipation [1] 230:25 Antiquated (2)60:17 169:17 Anxious [1] 198:24 Anyway HOl 49:12 56:9 94:14 101:22 103:7 110:18 164:12 187:24 221:16 228:11 Anyways [1] 170:5 Apartment [1)98:15 Apologize [1)3:10 Appear [1^203:15 Appeared [1 35:13 Appearing [l) 203:10 Applause [3)187:16 210:13 232:5 Appliances [4] 97:3 135:23 135:24 135:25 Applied [ i n 67:21 Apply m 105:22 105:24 Apport ion [1)62:22 Appreciate [3] 9:19 90:14 146:22 Appreciated [1)55:8 Appreciation [117:4 Approach 114 30:26 31:24 43:8 43:8 44:12 86: 1 92:19 124:6 127:16 127:17 170:7

170:15 190:3 190:14 Approaches [1)195:16 Approaching [1)138:25 Appropriate [5 23:25 40:10 41:8 57:15 98:18 Appropriat ing (1) 177:21 Approval [3 169:22 170:2 232:20

Kl 1] 154:3 S?

[3)46:21 48:4 48:14 Alarming [ l j 169:20 Albedo [2)15:10 15:10 Albeit

Apri l I [4)9:17 45:12 45:13 148:16 Apropos [1)18:5 Aquifer [6] 60:2 60:3 60:4 60:7 60:11 162:15 Aquifers I [5] 20:14 59:11 59:14 60:19 104:16 Arabia [1)51:25 Arbitrary [11171:2 Area [23] 7:11 7:1216:9 41:11 41:14 41: 23 42:21 45:19 46:6 47:24 48:2 48:4 48:15 49:6 49:10 49:12 63:9 59:12 75:6 81:9 107:3 122:22 163:23 Areas 101 29:25 30:7 43:4 47:19 47:25 48: I 48:24 75:1 75:5 82:121101:15 117: 10 117:11 117:12 147:24 201:21 Argue [1] 149:21 Arguing

Argument [1] 107:8 Arguments [1)41:5 Arrange [1] 98:26 Arrangements [1) 67:8 Arranges [1] 99:2 Arrivals [1] 105:19 Arrived [1)182:11 Art [2] 53:13 169:9 Article [1] 186:23 Articulate [2)91:25114:7 Artif icially p j 46:20 101:17 ASAP [1] 235:3 ASCII [1] 235:19 Aside [2)195:22 205:16 Aspect [3) 189:1 194:20 228:18 Aspects [3] 91:21 117:6 231:2 Assembled [1] 26:23 Assess [1] 200:10 Assessing [1] 118:17 Assessment [1] 204:12 Assets [1) 83:20 Assign [1] 190:4 Assigned [2)27^19 91:23 Assist [1] 79:1 Assistance [1] 29:25 Associate [1] 106:7 Associated [2] 18:15 134:22 Associat ion [4] 2:16 88:8 114:15 115:10 Associations [1] 151:16 Assume [2)43:12 206:6 Assumed [1] 31:20

#k T^s^umes [1)121:14 Assuming [11109:15 Assumption [1)130:10 Assumptions [5)31:11 31.18 32:7 36:8 75:12 Astray [1] 180:13 Athabasca [11161:5 Atlantic [1] 210:13 Atmosphere [18111:7 11:10 12:10 39:24 42:23 61 5 65:6 66:6 74:9 161:15 162:9 163:5 163:8 163:9 163:14 166:9 174:1 174: 9 Atmospheric [3] 44:21 63.16 160:3 ATMs [1] 209:20 Attacked [1)48:10 Attacking [1] 45:18 Attempt [3134:6 113:12 221:10 Attempting [1] 200:1 Attend [1] 113:8 Attention [4)4:2 38:19106:11 185:16 Attitude 11] 83:22 Attitudes [2] 154:10 154:20 Attorney [1] 220:18 Attractive [3] 93:14 97:13 170:17 Attractiveness [1)81:23 Attributed [1] 200:22 Attributing [1175:4 Attys [1] 535:25 Auction [1) 93:14 Audience [10] 6:2 27:14 67:4 67:9 88:19 131:7 131:9 131:11 131:13 160:2 186:4 187:20 187:21 188:20 198:18 213:5 220:17 231:12 232:12 Audiences [1] 185:13 Audit [11110:10 Auditorium 611:16 4:24 25:9 235:5 235:11 235:

CO IRP Technical Session; 6181 [31 :JB:2 2(1:2 232:13 Behave [1] 156:22 Behaving

el 155:13 ehavior

[26] 2:18 57:10 83:13 114:25 146:16 148:18 147:2 147:21143.3 148:11 148:16 150:14 155:2 155:14 156:24 156:25 157:22 157:25 158:3 158:7 158:12 158:20 177:4 177:8 177:9 203:5 Behavioralty

gl 136:3 177:23 Bhaviors

[3)136:8 155:23187:10 Behind [12] 39:20 39:22 45:19 48:11 136:13 155:1 173:18 184:22 185:5 213:19 214:20 215:11 Be l i ng m 140:20 Beings [1] 172:12 Belief (6) 2:16 114:25 138:16 138:17 146: 16 146:18 Believes

g] 61:10 91:16 elow

Bl 11:18 48:5 60:5 93:8 enchmark

g) 82:0 04:6 94:13 enchmarking

y l 94:5 94:10 95:5 eneflclal

y l 112:5 179:5 enent

PJ 126:18 134:15 172:15 Benefits [15] 81:25 101:18 112.23 115:24 116: 1 125:10 125:11 125:15 125:21 127: 17 134:21 166:14 177:20 204:14 204: 17 Best [23] 34:23 36:14 86:3 101:18 107:13 127:12 127:15 137:23 151:2 162:20 164:25 165:2 165:20 168:2 175:5 183:8 163:9 185:13 186:11 201:21 217:4 226:21 234:11 Better p6) 14:14 27:25 32:23 82:1 66:8 105 14 113:7 113:25 126:23 127:3 128: 17 133:8 135:8 135:13 142:6 142:15 150:25 161:1 151:11 158:9 164:7 165:1 182:8 208:25 210:24 220:17 Between [23] 18:7 25:3 32:18 34:7 40:21 59: 19 79:9 79:24 89:20 106:17 119:11 123:22 129:7 145:9 160:18 162:2 162:17 191:7 214:18 218:14 220:20 223:25 224:4 Beyond [6] 21:12 70:14 81:15 96:15 139:5 186:1 BFO [2] 199:22 199:22 Btddtng 1180:11

iV August [11184:4 Aust in [1] 216:8 Australian [1] 77:5 Authorized (11105:13 Automatically [2193:11 111:20 Automobiles [1)82:15 Availability [31117:6118:12133:15 Available [28] 3:21 5:6 10:16 26:6 26:6 37:23 53:17 53:19 54:4 68:7 80:7 80:13 116:11 116:16 117:7 117:8 117:9 117:10 117:13 117:16 117:16 134:5 135:9 135:10 171:9 171:14 171:15 231:14 Avenue [1] 235:15

Average [61 9:11 11:17 121:2 128:14 129:17 169:19 Averse [1)96:3 Aviat ion [5] 31:22 33:10 33:13 33:16 62:23 Avoid [2)70:6 125:18 Avoidance [1)93:12 Avoiding [2)167:5 202:14 Avoids [1] 183:1 Award [1] 29:22 Awarding [1] 29:16 Awards (1) 201:12

[5] 4:19 66:7 148:23 149:2 187:10 Awareness [1] 37:6 Awerbuch [1] 72:9 Awful [1] 107:21 Awhile (1) 66:10

B ^ 5 B [1)82:19 Backed [2] 72:7 226:1 Background [9] 2:3 4:10 7:15 28:11 50:13 147:6 156:14 200.17 205:15 Backing [2] 225:3 225:9 Backs r i ] 64:7 Backwards

g] 36:20 98:2 106:2 ad

[10] 13:22 21:23 21:23 22:11 68:24 99:9 147:5 149:25 181:14 210:24 Baffl ing [1] 179:22 Bag [2166:25 67:12 Bagasse M] 164:6 Balance [3141:15 52:4 84:7 Balancing (1) 109:7 Ballast M] 144:1 Ballasts r i ] 168:24 Bands [1] 17:5 Bang [31122:2127:15143:3 Bank P l 98:8 144:24 Banning [3] 140:20 143:21 143:23 Bar ID 15:8 Barber's [1] 47:15 Barge [1) 149:25 Barges 12)63:10 63:12 Barrel P) 108:4 161:9 Barrels [8] 126:1 160:13 160:14 160:23 160: 25161:8161:13 161:17 Barrie [2] 110:7 110:12 Barrier

[6] 59:19 134:8 152:13 152:25 154:5 180:11 Barriers [17] 132:1 146:8 148:9 150:16 150: 20 151:3 151:5 151:9 151:12 151:15 152:24 158:10 158:12 179:10 180:7 180:8 180:25 Barry [12] 2:20 115:2 159:3 159:3 159:7 159:10 168:1 173:24 175:9 175:18 181:20183:4 Bars [2)17:6 212:10 Barton 11)13:3 Basaltic [1] 20:17 Base [5] 20:23 123:8 221:25 225:24 226:10 Base-load [1)226:10 Based [17) 31:14 40:14 45:1 45:25 70:4 92: 1 92:10 92:15 110:22122:3 126:17 126:20 126:22 171:1 203:5 208:22 217:2 Baseline [5] 28:13 30:12 30:15 32:14 226:18 Baselines [1] 22:25 Bashing [1)61:1 Basic

g) 10:11 102:21 104:7 asis

[9] 45:6 47:20 69:4 77:20 99:22 119: 13 149:19176:25 211:12 Bathrooms [1] 66:20 Batted [1)157:7 Battery [2180:16141:24 Beach [9) 46:21 46:22 47:7 48:23 46:25 48: 25 49:8 49:9 49:11 Beaches [14] 48:16 48:17 48:17 48:19 48:21 49:1 49:7 49:13 49:14 49:16 49:18 49:2149:23171:6 Beacon [1] 184:3 Bear [1] 158:23 Beat [1] 179:14 Beautiful [4] 71:25 108:3 108:4 175:21 Beautifully M) 145:22 Beauty yl 80:22 98:24 106:7 108:8 170:21

ecame [1)201:6 Become [15)18:23 51:3 51:14 52:25 53:1 59: 17 65:16 92:8 106:14 108:16 133:8 159:4 171:7 195:6 223:7 Becomes [5] 63:13 03:18 102:2 118:2 211:8 Becoming (1)212:3 Bed 11) 104:24 BEFOREiValerie [1)235:12 Began [21202:23 229:15 Begin (5) 47:19 76:1 78:17 110:24 169:24 Beginning [7] 25:21 76:6 83:17 109:14 138:8 181:14 194:16 Begins M] 51:12 Begun P l 76:5 146:20 Behalf

[33119:22 21:6 39:12 46:15 54:19 60: 10 60:21 75:16 80:S 64:12 88:9 92:8 116:3 126:15 134:8 137:8 138:6 139: 15 144:9 146:10 146:6 154:2 156:5 173:18 175:22 179:16 186:24 187:15 187:15 187:19 206:6 206:16 213:15 Bigger [11 153:25 Biggest [6] 87:16 88:16 132:1 143:3 151:5 158:14 181:7 211:19 Bike [6] 141:5 141:9 151:2 151:4 151:8 Bikes (1] 82:25 Biking

[28] 37:22 87:25 88:22 88:22 91:21

yt.i!4 95 25^03 26 110 12110 13 110 18 110 21 132 24 189 4 189 7 189 10 189 11190 21 191 7 191 22 193 6 207 19 207 22 222 8 222 24 22915 230 3 2301 Billboards (111081 Billed: Orig [11235 2 Billing

§195 24 9813 235 2 fllion

[13] 156 6 160 12 160 14 160 25161 13161 14161 20162 4162 20163 4183 8163 191791 Bills

^ } ^ " ' 111178 Biodiesel [14] 64 14 73 17 73 20 73 23 60 2 82 19104 25 107 9164 13 164 17 165 916618165 20182 Biofuel 017010 716107 Biofueled [1180 B[ofuels [13] 51 16 61 21 52 1 64 14 64 14 64 24 70 1971 15 75131161612212 160 22181 2 Blogas 121165 161651 Biographies m 5 9188 1 Biological (1170? Biology m i 6 3 Biomass [11)31 10 116 16122 9 122 11 164 1 164 6 164 11 165 10 165 14166 19 225 2 Bios Bipartisan (31219 2113 21 1

[30)916 9 1711 15 29 2 29 2139 9 51 2 61 4 90 3 92 9 94 6 97 6 98 8 10210115 212918130 8134 7 139 8 130 17 148 7148 12 146 20 156 7 158 6173 3174 5 176 14181 14 206 1 Bitumen 1) 161

azing 221

end 1] 821

easing 116

Ind [11191 1 Blinding 1) 199 2

ink 11133

ock [210716 971 Blocked 1] 1841

ue [4] IS 18 44 22 167 22 178 Board (4)7818 62 91071227 2 Boats [1)179 Body [2)4 17199 Bolimeier [1)1151 Bond [11134 1 Book ri ]36 Bome [1)229 2

HECO IRP Technical Session; 6« Boss [1] 114:17 Bottle

g] 87:25 156:10 166:21 178:7 ottles

[5] 156:1 156:6 156:18 156:19 178:25 Bottom

e) 121:5 144:2 163:18 217:13 ought

[1] 73:23 Boulder [1] 157:8 Boulevard [1)48:5 Bouncing [1) 143:7 Bound

y] 138:24 oundaries

[1] 74:10 Box [3)23:25 210:18 212:7 Bralner [2)132:16 136:20 Brainers n ] 136:4 Braking [3] 141:15 141:22 141:23 Branch [2)29:9 29:10 Brand

Bl 165:1 rans on

[1] 163:3 Bravo y] 199:22

razil

Break [7] 50:9 65:21 66:10 139:8 181:3 187: 17 187:23 Breaking

y] 129:6 reaks

[1)146:12 Breathe

y] 77:24 rian

[15) 2:17 58:14 58:15 59:8 63:2 114: 16 127:22 127:23 128:3 137:11 150: 23 168:12169:2 181:4 181:19 Brian's [1)114:18 Bridge

B] 184:6 rief

[6] 27:18 50:11 99:24 219:11 221:2 Briefing

y ] 28:21 riefly

[ I ] 156:3 Bring [ I I ] f 7 46:20 50:8 51:19 67:9 67:13 67:15 73:12 138:2 143:3 143:11 Bringing p ] 51:20 51:20 73:20 134:10 140:18 140:18140:19 Brings [3] 111:24 141:22 151:22 Brit ish [2)144:18145:11 Broader [1] 82:7 Broken [3)10:22 62:12 88:23 Broken-down [1] 10:22 Brothers [1] 63:10 Brought [6) 13:6 49:17 71:23 71:24 147:4 186:

Brown [2)66:25 67:12 Brutally [1] 198:22 BTUs

[11125:25 Bubbling [1)182:18 Buck 13)122:2127:15 143:4 Bucket [1)164:8 Budget

Bl 38:25 44:6 134:16 134:19 ul ld

[9] 45:20 71:4 165:22 170:18 207:24 209:15 211:2 211:16 215:23 Building 113) 49:6 74:19 61:9 130:13 135:4 135:5 136:19 136:25 157:16 165:16 176:24177:24 209:4 Buildings [20) 45:20 74:19 128:17 128:19 128: 22129:1 132:5135:1 135:24 136:11 136:15 136:17 166:18 169:15 176:8 176:12 176:13 177:10 177:11 177:16 Built (1149:14 Bulbs [3)81:13132:13166:25 Bull [1)91:17 Bullet [2)17:2019:17 Bullets [1)17:21 Bunch [5] 4:6 161:17 151:18 213:5 226:21 Burn [12] 17:15 77:1 131:18 163:15 166:8 167:21 168:22 173:25 174:8 174:8 218:2 226:13 Burned e j 132:23 133:9 166:7 178:5

umett [1)91:1 Burning [4] 14:21 73:19 161:10 163:19 Bus [3)161:1 166:22199:7 Busch [1] 88:8 Bush (2) 14:9 23:7 Business [14] 2:6 8:3 8:6 20:9 26:12 26:21 69: 25 70:20 93:18 130:21 131:2 211:14 227:17 227:21 Buslness-as-usual [1] 20:9 Businesses [8] 72:24 73:8 73:8 102:13 132:2 144: 10144:12 211:13 Button [1] 140:24 Buttressed y ] 158:9

uy [14] 73:10 73:10 74:14 75:19 85:1 85: 10 92:22 132:14 145:12 166:14 166: 14 208:16 217:10 227:17 Buying (8) 22:3 83:7 97:17 126:14 132:22 210:10 215:22 217:10 B ^ issir

rSTT [1] 234:18 Cabinet [1] 27:23 Cabinet-level (1) 27:23 Cabled [1] 107:7 Calculate [8] 30:24 108:17 110:3 110:9 110:14 110:15 110:16 110:20 Calculated [2)32:15 209:4 Calculating p]31:1 31:5

Calculation [1] 79:17 Calculation's [1] 178:24 California [14] 22:9 66:3 91:17 92:13 96:7 96:7 96:22 176:13 178:18 181:8 181:9 183:12 215:25 218:4 California's [1] 157:17 Camera [1] 4:23 Campaign [2)69:8 173:4 Campbell [2)47^13 71:4 Campus ra) 137:13 176:7 176:8 178:1 183:16 184:5 164:15 186:15 Campuses 12)183:18184:9 Canada (3) 140:22 143:21 164:4 Canada's [1)181:8 Canal [1] 48:14 Candidate [1] 195:13 Cane [2)60:17164:6 Cannot [5) 62:14 116:7 130:23 168:13 228:16 Cans [6] 156:1 156:6 166:18 166:19 178:25 Cap I m 23:7 85:2 92:21 92:22 103:8 111: 23 111:24 I Cap-and-trade I (18j23:3 23:7 23:8 23:10 23:17 26:1 85:2 92:13 92:19 93:10 93:16 103:4 103:8 108:10 111:18 111:20 227:11 227:11 Capabilities [1] 120:1 Capacity [2)119:24120:5 Capita [2)107:12 152:17 Capital [5] 84:23 64:24 101:3 132:10 132:15 Capitally [1] 165:22 CAPITOL [3)1:16 235:6 236:11 Caprock [3)59:18 59:18 59:22 Caps (2)43:18 43:20 Capture [7] 65:24 70:7 104:11 104:23 134:14 140:17 157:9 Captured [1)141:24 Capturing [1] 20:19 Car [91 74:15 74:16 76:19 76:19 141:12 142:3147:6152:9 209:18 Carbon I (105) 11:14 12:6 12:10 12:14 12:17 14:17 19:13 19:14 19:16 20:13 20:19 22:23 23:16 24:7 24:16 24:20 24:23 31:10 31:13 65:23 66:1 56:2 56:3 56: 6 56:7 56:7 64:2S 65:24 74:12 75:13 75:14 75:15 65:2 91:8 91:13 92:11 92:16 94:12 100:8 102:1 103:3 103:7 103:11 104:3104:11 104:20104:21 105:18 105:22 106:8 106:10 108:16 110:4 110:4 110:9112:24125:11 128:10 128:24 129:2 133:23 134:4 137:5 141:6 157:6 157:131158:19 161:7 161:14 161:18 161:21 161:22 162:6 162:7 162:8 162:131162:17 163:4 163:14 166:2 166:3)166:7 173: 13 173:25 174:8 174:19 174:23 174: 24 175:2 175:5 194:9 104:24 196:15 106:19 196:21 196:23 197:20 204:11 206:16 212:4 226:4 226:12 227:17

I m : 7 \ 229:$ Carbon-per-ki Iowa tt [1] 226:4 Care (5) 36:22 67:6 72:2 102:16 102:24 career P l 88:3 Careers (1)171:6 Careful [2] 98:7 96:21 Carefully " 42:13 42:15 63:8 53:14 96:13 191

• E CO IRP Technical Session; 6/8) Cents (14) 120:12 120:15 120:17 120:17 131:19 196:21 210:18 210:23 211:1 211:4 211:6 211:7 211:24 228:18 Centuries (2] 16:14 56:1 Century [14)16:14 16:21 39:12 39:23 40:9 40: 10 40:14 45:4 46:9 47:22 48:19 56: 12 57:21 57:23 Certain [5] 11:9 36:21 153:8 155:23 226:23 Certainly [24] 16:20 16:14 18:20 24:1 50:22 50: 25 51:20 51:23 61:9 61:19 101:6 103: 3 105:1 107:10 111:12 112:7 148:21 160:10 171:17 173:7 173:18 193:18 195:17 204:10 Certificate [2)209:10 209:13 Certificates [4] 206:21 208:13 208:14 229:5 Certified [1] 234:18 Certify (1) 234:6 Cetera [2)^109:5 228:7 CFL [2] 133:9 143:21 CFLs [2)132:25133:5 CH4 [11 30:17 Chain [2)124:17149:19 Chair p ] 2:12 67:3 87:7 Chairs [1 114:18 chal lenge (18) 19:16 78:19 82:18 87:16 88:16 101:21 132:17 133:2 154:24 173:11 174:3 174:10 197:14 197:14 197:23 206:6 215:4 215:8 Challenged [11 6:23 Challenges [41102:10 109:14 109:18 214:8 Challenging [^16:5138:23 Champion (11 87:f Chance [2199:18158:6 Chancellor [1] 86:6 Change [113] 2:3 2:18 2:21 4:10 4:14 5:23 7: 15 7:25 8:3 11:13 13:2 13:21 14:3 14: 14 15:12 29:23 30:2 30:5 30:6 32:18 41:16 43:10 43:12 43:13 43:15 44:17 44:22 50:13 50:18 51:8 52:18 52:21 56:9 58:7 60:25 62:5 63:3 63:6 84:7 64:15 65:5 68:19 70:2 70:3 70:7 71: 14 72:5 83:13 87:2 67:17 88:12 69:6 100:14 106:3 112:5 112:20 115:1 142:6 146:15 146:18 147:2 147:21 147:25 148:22 148:23 148:25 149:18 152:25 153:10 153:20 153:22 154:11 154:18 154:20 155:2 155:17 155:20 156:4 156:20 156:23 156:24 157:6 157:9 157:25 158:3 158:7 158:12 158:13 158:15 158:16 170:13 170:14 170:20 171:6 174:1 174:9 177:8 179: 10 180:5 185:4 186:6 186:16 187:5 187:9 188:15 198:25 199:13 200:25 202:1 202:8 202:19 213:12 219:16 CHANGE/GLOBAL [31 1:10 235:4 235:10 Changed [4151:11138:14138:14156:25 Changes (12) 17:16 18:13 37:16 38:6 52:23 55: 5 64:2 130:22 148:6 149:1 179:21 227:5 Changing [^146:11203:4 chapter

(1) 202:3 Characteristic [2)117:7 117:8 Characterization [21221:8 224:16 characterize [6] 9:1 10:1 10:14 23:24 55:22 118:7 Characterizes [11 223:2 charge [6] 96:6 97:19 98:11 207:14 223:6 223:9 Charging P] 95:19 98:17 Charles [11 12:7 Chart [10] 17:20 19:3 31:12 31:15 129:25 134:2148:4149:16 150:11 156:7 Chartered [11 204:24 charts (21129:6 186:9 cheaper [11192:16 cheapest [11194:23 cheaply [11 22:4 check [2)155:18 235:20 Chemical (2)144:13 144:15 Chessboard [21 99:2 99:3 chevron (2176:24 160:17 Chicago [3] 9:3 23:22 228:20 chief (11 27:24 Children [1110:8 Chimera [1] 182:22 China [3)94:1 129:3 178:13 Chip [22] 2:7 8:11 8:11 38:1 38:5 38:10 50: 1 62:6 54:8 54:11 66:2 66:17 56:19 67:20 58:5 58:12 50:10 60:23 83:2 86:16 171:1 171:5 Chip's [3)16:12 38:2 61:7 Chlorinity [1) 60:8 Chlorofluorocarbon [11 55:15 Choice [6] 73:1 93:3 102:6 139:14 140:18 145:20 Choices [6] 82:21 138:24 139:9 140:2 146:5 152:5 Choose 16] 84:14 84:17 85:10 92:22 97:25 99:

Chopsticks [11140:20 chose [1] 79:9 CHP [1133:3 Chris [1 91:1 Churchill [11 158:21 Circle (1)84:13 Circled [11216:17 Circulating [11213:16 Circulation [3142:25 53:6 55:25 Circumstance [1] 26:14

S? Cari [12) 2:22 n:22 168:11 186:12188: 13 188:17 198:2 200:13 223:15 223: 23 230:2 231:6 CartltO [1] 104:4 CARNAZZO [1] 235:1 Carnegie [1)76:12 Carpool [1)151:1 Carry [1] 83:24 Carrying [I ] 179:25 Cars [ I I ] 74:14 74:17 76:13 76:16 76:17 82:17 82:20 82:22 102:23 168:15 167:4 Case [15)41:4 42:10 49:4 49:5 85:20 91: ^4 09:11 122:21 132:25156:5181: 26 210:12 210:17 229:6 235:6 Cases [3] 24:7 62:18 194:1 Cat [2] 78:3 235:22 Catalyst [1)57:13 Catastrophic [2] 55:5 56:25 Catastroph ically (1) 58:8 categories [5] 28:16 32:25 35:5 176:12 206:13 Categorized [1] 62:11 Category (2)32:19 116:17 Causes [3)15:20154:11 154:21 Causing [5)59:14 97:21 103:14 174:2 174:9 Caverns [1)104:17 CCS [1] 20:20 Celling [3)143:8143:8144:2 Coll [21140:22183:19 Cellular [2)116:25119:6 Cellulose [2)126:22126:24 Callulose-based (1) 126:22 Cement [1] 33:24 Cent [3)156:15 156:16 211:14 Center [8129:12 34:16 47:14 121:1 143:17 162:10185:14 201:7 Centers [1] 208:8 Centigrade [2)17:817:9 Centimeters (2)46:16 47:17 Cantral (1) 97:5

Citizens (1) 64:8 City [101 9:3 141:20 152:3 152:19 207:11 208:1 208:10 210:13 217:22 234:2 Civil [1] 235:4 Civil ization (1) 40:20 Claim [21132:20159:16 Claiming [1] 149:6 Clarence [1] 67:20 Clarified [1)62:11 clarify [1] 56:20 Class [4)145:4 145:4 179:11185:22 Classic [2] 9:2 9:2 Clean (6) 23:6 23:19 29:9 29:9 36:25 37:1 206:19 211:18 Cleaner [11130:16 Clear (19) 23:25 98:18 130:5 137:23 147: 18 147:19 147:22 153:8 155:20 155: 23 180:11 189:11 189:14191:21 191: 25 192:5192:6 106:7 213:15 Cleariy [14] 12:22 16:12 38:9 78:24 84:3 64: 9 96:15 107:2 108:8 108:8 110:14 110:15 106:6 230:15 Clients (1) 81:8 Climate [87] 1:10 2:3 2:21 4:10 4:14 5:22 7: 15 7:25 11:13 13:2 13:21 14:3 14:14 15:0 15:12 15:21 23:22 29:23 30:2 30:4 30:6 38:6 40:20 49:9 50:13 50: 18 51 ;6 52:24 56:9 60:25 62:5 63:3 63:16 64:6 64:15 65:5 66:19 69:12 70:2 70:3 70:6 71:14 72:4 81:19 86:6 67:2 87:17 89:6 106:2 112:4 112:20 113:3 147:25 148:20 148:22 148:25 149:1 152:25 153:10 153:20 153:22 164:11 154:16 154:20 155:20 156:23 157:5 157:9 156:15 158:18 170:13 170:14 170:19 174:1 174:9 188:6 186:15 168:15 198:25 199:13 200:25 202:1 202:10 219.18 226:20 235:4 235:10 Climates [1] 182:8 Close [51 8:10 28:25 122:17 137:1 232:15 C l o s e r [1)11:12 Closing [412:25182:10188:4 231:18 Closure [1] 33:23 Clothesline (11151:19 clothesl ines (1)151:17 Cloud [1] 15:10 Cloudy [1)117:11 Club [6] 2:19 114:24 146:14 148:19 173: 16 180:2 Club's (1) 173:20 Cluster [1] 184:2 Clutter [1)154:13 CO [1] 235:1 C02 [16] 30:17 31:8 31:18 31:19 70:7 77: 18104:22110:14111:17112:12129;

1fa151:18 11^2:20165:9174:1 174:9 Coal P6) 14:22 17:18 21:1 21:17 70:4 70: 4 70:8 76:17 77:5 77:5 122:11 122: 11160:6 161:20 161:24162:2 182:5 162:5 162:24 163:19 175:9 176:14 175:22 216:3 225:3 226:0 225:10 225:10 225:16 226:16 226:2 226:9 226:12 226:12 227:2 Coal-flred [1] 161:20 Coalition m 60:12 Coast P) 80:8145:11 Coastal [6] 47:15 47:19 47:23 49:22 89:9 89:9 Coastline (8] 45:16 45:18 47:5 48:9 48:11 146: 2 170:19170:24 Coastlines (11170:15 Coasts [1)45:19 Cochair [1)3:9 Coded [1)71:15 Coffee [1] 9:8 Cofunded [1] 66:4 Colder (3)11.1511:16 51.1 Colleague [1] 8:10 Collect [3)50:6 86:3167:13 Collected (3)182:3 182:7 182:13 Collecting

g) 99:20 168:10 ollectlon

[2)58:20182:10 Collective [1)138:13 Collector [1)216:11 Collectors [1] 143:13 Color M] 43:1 Colorado [2)157:6 160:20 Coloring [1) 228:8 Columbia [2)144:18145:11 Column p ] 32:20 30:25 40:3

Combat m 206:14 Combination [2] 77:8 83:13 Combined [5] 38:25 43:5 116:16 120:3 130:3 Comfortable m i 6 : 3 Comic [1] 36:7 Coming [19] 7:4 10:25 21:9 21:19 25:7 44:5 46:6 74:8 79:3 79:25 85:24 111:4 135:11 144:12161:9 230:21 231:1 232:19 233:2 Commencing [4)1:16 235:6 235:10 235:11 Comment (4)63:16112:8 220:19 231:7 Comments 11) 100:10 166:26 199:1 202:22 202: iB 220:13 222:10 222:16 223:1 231: 13 232:25 Commercial 12) 32:20 81:14 105:9 122:17 122:

i3 128:19 128:22 129:1 129:7 129; 11136:9136:25 Commercially

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/( [1)118:12 Commercials [1)213:2 Commission [15] 3:17 27:7 34:18 86:3 71:2 86:6 105:2 193:18 193:21 194:13 194:15 196:10199:8 223:20 232:20 Commission's [1] 223:22 Commissioned [1] 152:19 Commissioning (1) 136:11 Commissions [1] 72:13 Commitment [2)83:19 111:10 Commitments [2)155:6155:6 Committed [1)221:22 Committee [3)2:12 87:4 87:7 Committees (1) 114:18 Commodit ies [1] 208:22 Commodities-based [1] 208:22 Commodity (1) 208:16 Common [3)51:14 77:17130:10 Communicate [1) 184:18 Communit ies [2)60:21 178:17 Community [28) 5:24 6:457:4 64:3 79:10 84:8 84: 25 85:20 86:8 108:7 111:4 139:11 144:9 145:6 145:8 145:9 146:6 146:9 153:17 176:20 176:22 177:1 183:24 208:5 208:6 208:6 208:6 217:3 Commuter [ I ] 102:23 Compact [ I I ] 61:12 133:1 135:15 150:24 157: 3 170:25 181:6 181:10 213:6 213:10 213:13 Companies [2)134:0 206:24 Company [22] 1:6 2:11 4:6 6:14 5:20 5:21 6:5 16:9 73:11 78:1178:15 78:21 76:22 82:20123:11 144:14 160:17167:6 179:19 235:2 235:8 235:13 Comparabilit ies [1) 65:15 Comparable [1] 18:19 Compare [7] 28:14 43:9 44:13 60:25 65:23 72: 16161:19 Compared [4)14:16 34:2 44:10165.11 Compares [1) 34:2 Comparing [4)43.10 44:10 44:23 77:20 Comparison [2] 35:5 116:1 Comparisons [1) 72:18 Compelled [1)196:5 Compete [1] 201:12 Competit ive [4)29:14 29:16 29:21 201:12 Compile [1] 26:16 Complementary (1) 216:22 Complete [3)11:1 32:23 229:22 Completed [1] 29:20 Completely

[4)61:12 65:1 143:24161:18 Completes [1)60:11 Complex [1] 86:18 Compliance [4)23:21 92:3 93:11 95:8 Complicated [5] 15:2 89:15 90:3 222:21 228:24 Comply [1] 93:25 Component [5)112:15135:2156:8 171:18 200:23 Components [2)111:13151:26 Comport [2)196:2 200:13 Composted m 152:1 Comprehensive [1] 204:3 Computed (1) 44:23 Computer [1] 209:7 Computerized [1] 234:9 Concedes (1) 222:6 Concentrated [1] 168:3 Concentration [1] 19:13 Concentrations m 18:16 Concem [5] 22:5 47:24 48:12 171:19 173:7 Concerned [6] 17:22 22:2 43:25 63;24 69:6 74:4 Conceming [2)14:13 219:23 Concerns [2) 6:4 13:11 Concise [1] 189:2 Conclude

g) 29:3 29:4 36:6 oncluded

[1] 233:3 Condensation [2162:16 52:19 CONDENSED [1] 236:19 Conditioner [I ] 98:7 Conditioning [ I I ] 81:4 96:8 115:15 124:14 125:22 120:13 136:7 136:23 169:4 169:6 209:5 Conditions M) 40:24 63:3 174:2 174:10 Conducted Pl 29:7 34:15 Conference [3)5:16 61:15 210:4 Conferences [1)210:3 Confidential (1) 36:17 Conflicting [4)55:3 55:9 55:10 55:11 Confronts [1)164:18 Confusing (1) 153:22 Congestion [1] 103:13 Congressman [1] 13:2 Connect [1] 138:21 Connected [1] 139:14 Conscious [1] 128:7 Consequence p ] 155:21 155:24 157:23

Consequences , [9] 65:7 99:10 107:25 147:18 147:19 150:14155:19155:20170:12 Consequently [1)182:10 Conservation [4] 110:2 155:14 160:4 167:2 Conservatlonism [1)155:13 Conservative [6)40:11 47:11 59:2 59:5131:20 204 12 I Consider I [4)24:17 92:6 99:3187:6 Considerable P) 16:16 37:22 198:24 Considerably [1] 34:8 Consideration [3)36:16190:22 202:13 Considerations [1] 92:7 Considered [1] 220:21 Considering [1)199:3 Considers [1] 13:2 Consistency [1] 35:4 Consistent [5] 31:24 41:4 165:10 200:16 203:21 Consists 1]116:23 'onsp lcuous [1)155:13 Constant [1] 89:13 Constantly [1) 155:4 Constellations [1)54:18 Constituencies [1] 203:19 Constitutes [1] 180:22 Constrained [1)44:10 Constraints [1] 34:12 Construction [1] 166:21 Constructive (2)183:22197:12 Consumer (18) 6:20 27:7 73:15 74:1 74:3 97:7 97:13 98:13 98:13 105:8 ,112:23 118: 23 199:9 206:23 212:25 213:1 229: 24 230:9 I Consumers [5] 73:9 07:22 132:3 207:12 213:23 Consumption | [7) 33:19 »:17 83:9 126:21 128:24 161:24162:2 Con fd [1] 235:7 Contact [1] 78:4 Contained [1] 200:24 Containers (1) 166:3 Content [3)77:6 160:5 181:10 CONTENTS (1) 2:1 Context [2] 26:10 76:22 Continent [1] 42:17 Continental (1] 43:4 Continual (1) 120:6 Continually [2)80:15120:14 Continue

g

i '15)17:1518:118:1416:2121:1341:

CO IRP Technical Session; 6181 [21179:11207:1 Corporate-owned (1) 179:11 Corporation P) 2:2 3:2 3:7 Corporations [2)68:21 179:10 Correct [4] 105:12 110:8 180:12 234:12 Correlation [3)18:7 218:14 218:16 Cost [83) 10:7 30:7 72:16 73:13 91:25 93: 11 96:1 96:10 96:14 96:17 97:18101: 7 102:22 102:25 103:14 104:6 106:6 106:7 117:24 117:24 117:25 118:17 118:19119:8 119:15 120:5 120:7 120:12 120:14 120:16 120:18 120:18 120:23 120:24 121:2 121:9 122:7 122:8 122:8 122:10 122:13 122:17 123:5 123:21 129:22 130:17 131:5 131:6 131:17 131:21 131:23 131:24 132:3133:13 134:8 150:21 151:11 157:5 162:20 162:23 166:13 179:1 179:2 189:18 192:15 192:24 194:10 194:11 195:16 195:20 207:14 207:16 207:18 209:14 210:25 214:11 215:4 215:5 215:14 221:23 229:24 229:24 230:25

Cost-effective [5)30:7 91:25 93:11 123:5189:18 Costing (1) 132:6 Costs [34] 72:25 73:2 73:4 73:6 73:9 84:12 84:16 93:12 95:19 95:21 08:12 101:2 101:6 101:25 104:8 116:2 110:1 119: 3 119:5 119:17 119:22 120:16 120: 20 131:15 131:16 132:4 132:19 156: 23 157:9 162:17 165:16 180:16 229: 13 229:16 Count [4)68:24 82:5 96:6112:0 Counted [1)113:3 Counter [2)30:6 41:6 Counter-arguments [1)41:5 Counterproductive [1)229:12 Counties [2)34:18 201:8 Counting [4)111:21 112:1 113:2139:6 Countries (6) 23:20 60:25 172:26 172:25 173:9 212:16 Country [18] 20:4 21:17 23:13 34:7 69:16 72: 13 73:7 73:8 93:24 111:11 129:2 130: 25 143:23 170:20 206:3 208:11 217: 1 216:7 Counts [2)33:18 107:10 County p ) 62:12 62:19 62:23 196:3 196:8 230:10 230.11 234:2 Couple [15] 4:19 37:6 39:15 45:10 46:17 50: 16 91:6 97:23 98:15 115:23 119:8 132:9140:25 170:24 173:4 Coupled [1] 177:23 Couples [2)173:5173:21 Course [21] 27:6 28:18 04:4 133:21 135:17 141:21 151:2 160:4 163:1 164:1 165: 24 167:7 174:20 190:16 190:19 190; 19 192:8 206:14 209:17 218:11 223: 14 Court [10) 4:20 26:25 50:9 99:18 114:6 128: 5 188:22 205:22 219:8 232:4 COURT-REPORTING [1] 235:1 Cover [2] 144:1 200:21

12 68:16 68:18 78:/1(}(}:12 105:23 112:7 198:21 Curve (12) 96:5 96:6 96:13 115:22 118:1 118:19 119:9 119:11 119:12 119:12 119:21 120:3 Curves [10] 13:9 96:5 118:15 118:16 118:16 118:17 118:23 120:8 120:25 172:23 Customer [1] 98:10 Customers [2)195:4 203:19 Cut [3)66:9154:12 163:15 Cutt ing [1] 55:24 Cycle [13] 19:21 42:9 51:19 55:23 64:17 64 25 74:20 76:7 76:16 77:14 77:19 100; 18 124.6 Cycles [1] 19:19 Cyclones [1)53:4

, 37:11 79:13 79:19 107:8 119:17 121:14140:14 204:23 216:20 Continued [2] 39:24 42:3 Continues [1)201:14 Continuing [3)36:23 70:21 137:6 Continuous [1] 119:22 Contract [2] 140:25 214:2 Contracted [1] 179:16 Contractor [1] 29:11 Contracts [1] 96:22 Contribute (1) 39:25 Contributed [2] 32:24 33:20 Contr ibut ing [1)75:3 Contr ibut ion \S\ 43:21 43:23 43:25 44:9 £0:25 Contr ibut ions [2)43:17 78:23 Control [1)56:10 Control l ing [7] 2:15 4:12 55:19 114:3 115:6 168: 3 185:6 Controls [1)111:19 Convenient [1] 97:20 Convention [3] 30:4 30:12 121:4 Conversation [3] 16:15 138:3 186:14 Conversations [1] 136:16 Conversion [6] 47:25 77:10 115:21 116:24 117: 16117.21118.4122:24 Convert [2)15:11 151:10 Convert ing [1] 80:3 Cooking (1) 145:4 Cool [2)16:10139:24 Coolest [1] 141:23 Cooling

g] 15:20 15:21 16:16129:10160:23 oope rating

[1)201:23 Cooperative [2] 30:6 202:4 Coordinated (1) 63:25 Coordination [2)201:15 203:13 Coordinator [2)27:22199:18 Copies [2] 32:6 235:1

(5?27:1 235:21 235:22 235:22 235:22 Corals [1] 100:10 Core [4] 80:3 84:21 88:23 206:24 C o m [61126:17 126:20 128:26 144:22 144: 23 164:20 Corn-based [2] 126:17 126:20 Comer P l 67:12 67:14 107:3 Corollary [2] 52:8 102:14 Corporate

Covered (4)32:8 143:20145:21 165:3 Covering [1] 28:8 Covers [1] 25:3 Cradle [1] 124:7 Crafting (1) 109:22 Crash [1)72:11 Create (6) 6:21 77:17 184:3 208:17 208:18 226:13 Created [4)6:16 64:15105:1 145:15 Creating [3)144:4 216:4 227:20 Creature [1)182:24 Credit [5) 23:18 94:3 94:14 214:10 214:14 Crediting [1)21:12 Credits [14) 24:4 24:12 24:13 94:9 94:9 113: 3 120:22 133:25 134:6 135:9 135:10 174:19 214:11214:12 Crichton [1) 13:6 Crisis [1)151:24 Criteria (10) 30:23 189:15 189:17 190:6 192: 2 194:6 194:10 194:12 194:21 202:24 Critical [7) 9:21 78:1 81:10 86:14 86:15 89: 20111:4 Critically [1] 152:18 Crops [6] 15:11 51:21 71:6 75:1 107:9 165:1 Cross [3)46:21 120:25 121:3 Crosses [1)42.18 Crossroads [1]71:9 Crosswind [11142:15 Crowd P) 27:11 35:8 196:16 Crowded [1) 88:6 Crude [21124:15124:18

[211:24 234:5 CSR#353 [1)235:12 Cubic [2] 39:1 39:7 Culture [1) 49:9 Cumulative [1] 118:20 Cup [2)9:7 140:18 Cups [3)140:12 140:16140:17 Curb [2)152:7152:15 Curbslde [2)152:13152:22 Currency [1] 145:16 Current [15] 12:11 61:12 62:4 63:6 80:12 100: 18 117:24 122:12 154:10 160:13 178: 16 179:4184:21222:8 222:23 Currents [2) 63:4 63:20 Cursory (1) 189:2 Curtis [13] 2:10 6:17 10:18 67:24 68:6 68:

D T5al^ [2)154:23 176:25 Dakota [1] 163:7 Damage [1)101:8 Damaging (1) 75:8 Dampen [1)132:23 Dark [1)217:14 Darren [9] 2:24 205:6 205:8 205:8 205:11 205:21 227:3 228:5 231:8 Data [28] 14:19 31:16 32:9 32:10 32:23 32 24 36:2 35:4 36:13 36:15 36:16 36: 17 36:21 38:24 39:6 41:12 41:19 42: 2 42:7 42:12 44:25 47:18 53:17 63: 10 57:9 62:21 62:22 177:2 Date [7] 34:24 98:4 216:18 235:2 235:4 235:23 235:24 Dated [2)156:8 234:16 Daughter

tl) 187:8 )ave

[3)2:15114:14 115:10 David [4)115:6169:3 170:3171:9 Day-to-day [3)149:10 153:23 154:17 Daycare [1] 145:3 Day l ight ing m 142:23 142:23 142:24 143:3 180: 13160:15 180:20 Days [5] 45:13 60:18 63:9 85:24 151:19 DBEDT [28] 2:23 28:16 27:15 28:18 29:8 29: 10 34:4 34:16 37:19 37:25 53:16 75: 17 92:4 196:8 199:15 199:18 200:6 201:6 204:7 205:4 219:22 220:6 221: 17 221:21 222:24 223:7 223:8 223:12 D B E D r s [9] 27:19 27:24 199:16 200:3 200:5 201:13 202:21203:12 204:20 De [1)14:7 Deadly r i ]9:6 Deal (12) 5:7 18:11 22:10 68:20 86:3 89: 17 103:22 105:13 122:14 152:7 202: 4 223:21 Dealing P] 82:2 88:21 152:21 Deals

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/f 0)755768821 bnit [1)162

^384698169415951641 Death [1]1642 Debate (3)231139121861 Debating [1)1571 Decade mi416142060 Decades M 65 6 65 22 604138 [)ecember

Decided [4)7210011720617209 Decision [12)10617147181472315423 10013190161923192 221999 2025220212202 DecEsIoTHnakfng n] 164 23190131W151923199 Decisions

1114154171571017618176 191119152233223

DecDned Pl 3315331 DecDnes

a33 23 351 cDnlng

(1)60 Decompose [1]661

[3)96201206121 Decreased ri]331 Decreases

g

[1)331 Decfe2 asing

641864251612 lUCtlons

1)134

?f 21162141622416721197 107172281122S1

[deeper ri]1971 Defines 3)1181

Inttely 891810711091014321150 173141761

Definition P) 10951164116 Definitions [1)1951 Definitive [1)2222 Degree [3115214013412

^

S 11611171118177176179

Delay m 7 i i Delibefata

B]8S1 eliver

0)516482092 Delivered: Notified [1]2352 Delivering Pl 14713 2091 Demand (17)5122522966965966969 9613962196241195119191^ 241601216015160191909190 Demand^lde

Demands [2)512452

Democracy [1] 184:24 Democrat [1)61:21 Demolished

B) 18:10 emonstration

[4] 118:7 118:8 122:16 177:25 Denial [2)71:14 154:3 Denise (1) 86:5 Denmark [2)144:10 173:3 Denominate [1) 196:19 Density [6] 145:23 160:8 164:17 167:25 169: 9170:6 Department [23] 2:8 2:7 2:14 8:6 26:12 26:21 27: 21 29:8 34:17 38:2 38:10 66:2 66:5 90:17 90:22 147:4 180:12 180:18 189:24 191:2 201:8 203:22 230:6 Departments [1] 134:16 Departure 11) 29:2 Dependence II) 79:5 Dependent [3)86:20 66:20128:12

Depleted [2)20:23 116:7 Depleting [1] 101:2 Depletion

B] 100:17 epioy

[1] 20:19 bepo (1) 235:7 Deposit [4] 156:13 156:14156:15156:18 Depressing [1] 154:15 Depth g] 169:5 224:22

erived g) 80:10 116:6

escribe

B) 17:5 28:9 107:25 189:16 escribed

[2)95:12166:13 Description

g] 182:21 226:9 Bscriptive

[1] 26:21 Desert [1] 215:25 Desertlflcatlon (1) 17:24 Deserved [1) 34:21 Deserves

B) 34:25 estgn

[9] 2:22 59:8 84:1 84:19 84:19 84:20 86:2113:12188:17 Designated [1] 203:22 Designates [1] 27:20 Designation [1] 209:21 Designed p ] 30:3 37:9 83:16 Designee [1] 223:14 DeSllva [2)5:14 5:15 Desirable

G] 71:22 esire

[1] 93:6 Desired [1] 87:20

lope r:l5 208:17 209:14 210:11 211

Desiring [1] 102:14 Desk [2)230:8 231:4 Despair [1] 154:3 Despite (4)26:6 33:23152:19 152:20 Destroy [2)55:18 73:22 Destroying [3] 73:18 73:24 167:6 Destruction [1] 58:1 Detail [4] 13:25 36:19 39:9 202:16 Details [6] 99:12 197:8 197:8 197:13 197:15 197:17197:18197:23 Determinations (1) 127:1 Determine [3)124:9 189:17 190:6 Determined [2)192:9 224:22 Determining [1)125:10 Develop [161 6:7 9:24 22:24 24:9 29:16 30:14 30:21 46:8 62:1 93:25 123:18 123:20 182:24 201:16 229:21 229:22 Developed [18] 21:20 37:7 61:17 118:3 118:6 118:10 119:4 138:25 172:24 182:19 201:1 201:9 222:5 222:6 222:6 229:1 Developer (9) 207:1 9 211:11 211:19 214:9 214:23 Developer's [2)211:11 213:25 Developers [4)61:14 80:13171:21 211:16 Developing (5) 23:19 29:23 64:23 173:9 182:20 Development P2] 2:6 8:5 23:19 23:23 25:10 26:12 26:21 61:5 61.20 90:2 116:20 117:4 117:23 119:2 121:20 121:24 173:6 200:9 202:20 203:13 205:18 230:13 Develops (1) 123:22 Devices g] 80:22 96:4

evil's [1] 99:12 Devote [11121:20 Diamant [11 25:6 Diameter [2] 169:4 169:8 Died [1] 72:10 Diesel [5] 33:1 80:2 82:19 167:12 182:6 Difference [12] 34:6 61:22 119:11 129:6 135:16 138:13 154:9 156:5 168:16 166:5 183:15187:12 Differences [2)190:16191:6 Different (65)17:4 69:5 62:17 71:10 71:11 71: 13 72:6 72:16 72:17 76:21 77:21 83: 22 84:6 06:6 96:18 96:18 99:1 99:2 99:5 103:15 104:15 108:17 115:19 116:10 117:10 121:21 124:5 129:9 130:3 132:19 134:16 135:24 136:18 138:24 139:12 140:1 142:8 142:20 156:13 172:2 172:5 173:14 176:3 176:12 177:15 183:17 184:7 184:7 190:25 192:14 192:19 192:23 193:17 195:12 105:12 197:19 199:4 206:7 206:16 206:17 210:16 216:25 217:7 224:14 230:11 Difficult [14] 41:25 42:10 69:16 93:13 94:4 94: 6 94:7 102:2 133:15 150:22 163:17

155:21 181:1197:17 Difficulties [^93:18 101:4 Difflculty (1)180:3 Diffuse p i 59:23 143:9 144:3

[3)160:20 197:10197:17 Dimension [1] 187:3 Dioxide [33] 11:14 12:6 12:10 12:14 12:17 14 16 20:13 23:10 23:16 24:8 31:10 31: 14 66:1 56:2 56:3 56:5 66:7 125:11 128:25 161:7 161:15 161:19 161:21 181:22 162:6 162:7 162:6 182:13 162:18 183:4 163:14 166:2 166:3 Direct I [S] 43:8 50:8 78:22 81:15 218:14 Directed [2)50:17 202:12 Direction [10] 41:3 86:17 89:6 69:15 90:5 90:7 91:20 92:13109:25 150:20 Directly | (8) 75:3 62:4 82:6 63:18 200:22 204: 8 211:22 214:3 I Director [41 3:6 27:21199:17 223:12 Directors P) 78:18 227:24 Dirtiest [2] 218:6 226:12 Dirty [41216:2 216:5 227:16 227:18 Disagree [2113:25106:5 Disappeared [11 49:12 Disaster [318:12 62:4 89:8 Disconnected [1161:12 Discourage (1) 84:5 Discretion [3)193:19193:25 223:21 DISCUSS (1)43:17 Discussed [21 09:8 170:11 Discussing [11 87:25 Discussion [12] 8:1 6:3 6:20 7:5 60:10 68:19 69: 19 80:6 111:15 140:13 157:18 201:4 Discussions [21159:14 206:7 Disincentive [1] 98:9 DISKETTE [11 235:19 Displaced M] 77:19 Displacement Ml 124:10 Displacing [11 35:24 Disposable [11140:4 Dispose [2173:13140:6 Disposed [11144:15 Disposing [2173:13181:5 Distinguish [2194:16 96:5 Distinguished (2)27:5 27:8 Distributed (1)125:18 Distribution [31111:19125:5 125:17 Distributor [1] 33:2

I E C O IRP Technical Sess ion ; 6/8) District [1) 46:3 Disturbing [1] 158:5 Diverse [1] 116:9 Diversifying [1) 226:3 Divide [2)127:13 189:17 Divided [11176:12 Dividends [1] 227:25 Divides [1] 143:5 Division [4] 8:7 26:15 27:20 27:25 Divisions [1] 235:14 DLNR (2)34:17 201:8 Doc (1) 110:7 Dock [1)63:11 Docket (3)71:2 73:16196:11 Doctor [1)110:11 Documented [1] 39:10 Documenting [1] 39:17 DOH [4129:10 34:16 92:2 201:7 DOH/DBEDT [1] 202:19 Dollar (8) 73:21 75:24 131:7 131:8 145:8 163:3177:11196:20 Dollars [18] 75:25 98:14 119:16 119:17 131: 11 131:12 132:12 137:3 137:4 145: 12 145:12 162:17 179:19 162:7 210: 24 218:10 222:13 228:17 Domestic [2)19:14 33:10 Donate [1] 208:3 Done [44] 6:24 12:3 23:9 36:15 44:15 59: 11 70:8 71:21 73:12 83:17 93:24 104: 10 119:25 124:13 124:13 125:20 133: 20 135:5138:4171:22 177:16168: 17191:1 191:10194:17196:14 201: 20 205:17 205:17 205:19 208:7 208: 10 208:12 210:2 210:6 210:6 211:17 212:25 213:9 213:12 216:14 216:20 216:20 222:20 Door [1] 144:14 Double [6)19:12 38:23 111:21 112:1 120:4 123:16 Doubling [2)41:16 162:7 Doug [1)35:1 Down [46] 4:20 5:6 10:22 12:11 14:24 23:8 23:12 60:3 60:5 60:18 62:13 67:3 71: 11 71:21 72:6 88:23 119:16 120:15 120:24 121:16 126:7 129:5 137:6 137:7 137:22 143:9 143:14 144:1 144:3 144:8 144:11 156:8 163:15 174:21 180:21 188:6197:3 202:17 206:22 205:23 218:7 218:13 218:13 226:26 230:21 231:1 Downtown [5] 69:24 81:6 81:9 123:12 189:15 Dozen P) 49:16 64:2 Dr [83] 2:2 2:4 2:5 2:7 2:13 2:15 2:20 2: 23 3:2 8:4 6:20 8:22 13:6 26:21 26: 24 38:10 38:12 50:21 51:16 52:11 53: 5 53:20 54:5 54:13 55:8 55:13 56:21

56:22 57:16 56:4 58:6 56:13 58:15 59:12 61:1 62:14 63:5 63:20 64:17 65:8 65:25 72:9 76:8 90:15 90:22 90: 24 91:1 100:21 103:2110:12111:20 115:10115:12159:3 159:10159:12 169:13 174:4 174:12 174:16 175:12 175:17 175:19 181:25 187:25 198:8 198:10 198:19 219:25 220:2 220:5 220:10 221:5 221:7 221:10 221:13 223:4 223:8 223:14 225:5 225:12 225:19 229:14 Draft [2)32:16169:22 Drafted (1) 189:24 Drain [1] 45:24 Drainage [1)46:10 Draining [1] 45:23 Drains [3] 46:3 46:5 46:6 Dramatic [3)57:16 130:1 185:7 Drastically (1) 20:2 Draw

E) 60:3 60:5 rawing

[ I ] 60:18 Drawn [1)160:18 Dreading

B] 185:23 rier

[2)174:2 174:10 Drink [3)77:24 88:8147:8 Drive [ I I ] 25:19 45:20 62:20 82:22 83:2 83: 3 83:5 103:1 145:3 147:8 167:3 Driven [3)83:10132:3 227:9 Driver

g] 156:20 173:18 193:22 river's

[1)142:14 Drivers [2112:22 12:23 Drives P l 82:23 136:22 Driving [6 103:13 103:14 147:3 147:10 147: 15147:20 Drop [5] 119:18 144:1 145:3 154:8 178:7 Dropped [4)110:5119:8119:16 166:6 Drops [1] 120:14 brought [4)17:19 17:25 53:3 80:8 Droughts [4)17:2318:2151:13 53:2 Drunk [4] 147:2 147:10 147:15 147:20 Dry (3)45:18 47:25149:21 Dryer [1)151:19 DSM M) 134:11 bude [ I ] 185:24 Due [ I I ] 13:14 18:14 33:13 33:22 34:12 44:2 44:3 52:15 156:9 202:13 202:20 Duke [2)218:6 218:9 bumping (1) 60:19 Dunk [1] 166:21 buplexed [1] 235:19 buring [14] 12:5 31:20 35:11 40:6 46:7 53:3

51:2 73:16 78:2117:14117:14149:1 187:23 222:1 Dutch [1)160:11 Dwell [1] 96:3 Dynamic [1146:12 Dynamics [2] 38:25 42:4

2^8:20 Effective [20)30:7 53:7 91:25 93:11 101:17 103:9 103:12 104:3 122:7 122:8 122: 9 122:10 122:13 122:18 123:5 154:5 186:11 189:18 193:12 221:23 Effectively (10) 11:7 l i : 6 13:11 20:8 23:6 23:14 23:15 55:18 57:24 204:18 Effectiveness p ] 59:22 130:17 154:7 Effects (6) 54:12 57:14 63:3 63:4 149:24 194 12 Efficiencies p i 70:25 71:17 72:14 Efficiency [53] 2:16 19:5 19:25 19:25 20:1 20:7 33:14 33:14 33:16 35:23 79:15 79:18 81:11 81:16 87:1 95:17 107:12 109:3 109:11 114:19119:18120:1 124:2 124:16 125:2 127:2 127:3 127.23 128:2 126:9 128:9 128:16 129:20 130:2 130:4 130:11 131:1 131:4 132: 2 133:21 133:24 134:1 134:3 134:15 134:18 134:24 136:16 137:8 148:10 157:15177:18 205:17 218:20 Efflcient (24) 19.7 65:13 65:16 81:12 93:« 94: 2 100:19 101:9 101:18 102:23 124: 22 124:23 125:1 130:13 133:10 133: 17 133:18 134:6 134:10 136:12 157: 20 157:21 166:14 177:21 Effluent

[6) 34:14 89:8 128:7 202:5 204:15 222:11 Efforts [3] 7:14 30:9 224:24 Ego [1183:8 Eighties [4] 14:6 119:6 160:20 182:5 EIS

169:5 169:21 169:22 169:24 160:

E-mail [1] 232:24 Early [6)13:11 14:5 16:15 69:5 70:1 117:23 Earth [18] 10:15 11:3 11:14 11:17 11:19 38: 3 38:4 54:17 54:18 54:21 59:8 61:8 61:9 63:22 74:7 159:4 159:15 167:20 Earth-monitoring [1] 54:18 Ease [2)99:1 136:6 Easier [4)62:19 73:9 104:9109:21 Easiest [1)161:6 ^ aslly (5) 123:25 160:9 178:1 202:9 220:9 East [1)42:17 Easy (9) 80:19 94:21 136:5 141:2 148:6 157:12163:5 209:8 223:8 ECAC [3)229:10 229:11 229:12 Echo (1) 174:6 Echoing [11183:15 Ecologically [1] 165:5 Economic p i ) 2:6 2:13 8:5 24:16 26:12 26:21 68:2 68:3 72:3 75:17 75:18 75:23 75: 24 75:25 90:16 90:19 90:21 91:4 97: 10 98:11 98:20100:18101:22112: 23 120:20 156:20 167:23 194:12 223: 24 224:4 227:22 Economical [1)211:8 Economically [2)23:14 228:2 Economics [13] 2:14 90:17 90:22 91:5 96:12 100: 16 100:22 130:18 150:21 208:24 213: 19 214:20 227:9 Economist [2)95:16101:19 Economist's t l ) 90:18 Economists [1] 96:16 Economy [13] 30:8 75:20 76:3 85:5 85:17 100: 23 102:3 102:6 102:11145:7 145:8 145:15 203:5 Ecosystem [1] 64:4 Eddies [2)46:14 46:24 Edge [1] 29:21 Edlaon [2)69:13 218:4 Educate [3)213:4 213:6 218:22 Education (9) 83:14 83:15 133:21 180:12 180: 18 206:23 208:6 212:25 217:21 Educational [1)38:15 Effect (24) 10:13 10:24 10:25 11:8 12:23 IS: 14 48:6 52:13 52:18 64:9 56:6 64:20 94:2 130:1 153:1 156:6 161:11 187:5 194:23 212:9 213:24 217:12 223:17

[^ Either [14] 9:25 62:23 97:9 100:12 102:19 104:12 117:1 120:22134:11 149:4 176:20 178:13 194:21 230:24 EI [4] 52:25 53:1 53:2 53:3 Elect [11 98:1 Efectric [30] 1:6 2:11 3:22 4:5 5:14 5:20 28: 17 33:4 65:6 69:13 73:7 76:16 78:10 78:15 116:24 116:25 128:21 168:5 207:2 210:13 210:13 210:15 216:16 217:19 216:11 231:14 232:14 235:2 236:8 235:13 Electric's [11 3:15 Electrical [5] 96:14 129:14 134:16 134:18 134: 19 Electricity P9) 19:5 19:6 20:3 21:24 22:3 35:15 65:10 65:17 72:22 72:24 73:3 74:18 75:15 76:17 76:20 77:18 78:23 94:23 95:11 95:25 96:17 98:2 105:10 120: 19 121:9 123:9 125:3 125:4 128:20 130:22 130:25 135:21 142:8 162:22 168:14 168:16 168:19 176:8 209:6 Electromagnetic (1) 11:2 Electrotechnologles [2] 223:25 224:5 Elements [11190:3 Elephant [2)169:13 159:22 Elevation [2] 48:5 52:14 Eliminate [2)79:5158:10 Elsewhere [2)113:3178:19

Embedded [1) 100:23 Emergency (1) 97:12 Emerging [2)23:24 89:19 Emission [181 8:2 23:1 29:17 30:7 30:20 31:1 32:25 35:5 35:17 37:2 64:16 82:4 92: 17126:2 200:20 203:10 Emissions [120] 2:16 3:19 3:23 4:3 4:13 8:1 14: 16 16:16 19:14 19:21 23:12 23:13 23: 21 25:4 26:17 28:13 26:15 28:17 29: 11 30:12 30:15 30:25 31:10 31:18 31: 19 32:2 32:14 32:15 32:19 32:21 32: t s 33:5 33:6 33:9 33:11 33:16 33:22 34:1 34:3 34:6 35:14 35:20 35:22 36: i 36:19 36:24 53:17 66:7 61:6 62:10 62:16 64:25 65:4 74:12 74:16 74:17 75:9 78:4 76:25 77:2 82:10 88:21 88: 25 89:1 89:26 91:8 91:13 91:14 92: 20 93:6 93:22 93:23 94:1 94:8 110: 15 111:17 114:3 115:8 115:24 116: 14124:6124:11 125:11 128:10128: 26 129:2 129:3 129:15 130:1 132:10 133:24 134:4137:5 141:6 168:3 175: 11 176:16189:4189:11 189:12 189: 13 189:19 190:20 194:9 194:9 194: 24 195:6 196:8 197:9 200:25 202:15 304:11 209:15 221:22 222:4 224:14 327:12 230:16 230:22 230:23 Emit p) 77:13 92:22 227:13 Emits (2) 73:2 73:3 Emitted [1)77:18 Emitters [4)22:182:162:10 212:3 EmItUng p) 66:3 65:10 106:23 Emotion [4] 149:20 149:23 160:7 150:11 Emotional [4)147:14 148:6168:1 158:8 Emotionally p ] 160:14150.18151.14 Emphasize [2)34:10 203:16 Empirical [2)43:7 44:12 Employ [1] 20:20 Employed [31136:12176:1 Employees [1176:21 Empower [ l l 219:3 Empowered [D 164:22 Empty [2] 170:3 183:13 Enables (1) 227:15 Enact [2)199:16 202:8 Enacted [2)204:1 204:16 Enactment [1] 203:9 Enamored [1] 98:24 Encompass y] 203:20

ncom passes [11135:i Encourage [^6:1110:2 155:17 Encouraged Cij 113:4 174:25 Encouraging T4) 101:11173:6 186:8 200:12 (27) 5:4 17:10 19:5 40:10 64:9 96:12 90:7 98:20 113:15 115:25 121:5 124: 12 125:5 125:7 125:8 125:13 129:9

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/( 129:14135:18 211:8 211:25 212:19 213:17 227:8 231:8 231:9 231:25 Ended [2)55:16 147:10 Ending [3) 98:4^147:16 235:11 Ends [1] 178:7 Endured [1] 221:21 Energized [1] 100:17 Energy [280] 2:4 2:12 2:15 2:16 2:16 2:17 2: 24 3:9 3:24 7:11 7:13 7:23 8:7 8:9 8: 20 19:21 20:5 20:7 22:4 24:4 24:6 27: 13 27:16 27:19 27:22 27:23 28:1 29: 8 29:9 29:10 29:11 31:16 31:17 31: 19 32:21 33:5 33:21 34:22 35:2 35: 14 35:14 35:23 35:24 36:1 36:25 37: 1 64:19 64:22 65:16 66:2 66:3 66:5 71:7 72:10 76:13 77:6 77:9 79:15 79: 15 79:18 79:19 80:13 80:16 80:18 60: 20 80:25 81:2 81:10 81:11 81:16 81: 18 83:22 84:14 84:17 84:17 87:1 87: 1 87:4 87:6 87:13 87:17 93:6 94:24 95:3 97:14 100:19 103.22 107:12 107:20 109:2 109:2 109:3 110:18 114:15 114:16 114:17 114:10 115:4 115:9 115:10 115:18 115:24 116:2 116:3 116:4 116:5 116:8 116:10 118: 15 116:24 117:2 117:3 117:5 117:16 117:18 118:8 119:10 120:23 121:21 122:24 123:7 124:1124:6 124:10 124:11 124:20 125:8 125:10 125:24 126:5 126:10 126:18 126:18 127:10 127:23 127:23 128:2 128:3 128:9 128:9 128.17 128:18 129:4 129:10 129:20 129:21 130:2 130:3 130:4 130:12130:16130:18131:1 131:4 131:24 132:2 132:18 133:20 134:1 134:2 134:3 134:6 134:10 134:15 134:24 135:2 135:22 135:25 136:10 136:12 136:18 136:21 137:3 137:4 138:20 139:13 141:13 141:16 141:23 142:19 142:21 144:5 145:20 146:1 146:3 146:7 146:8 146:14 146:10 149:5 149:11 160:2 160:8 162:1 164: 15 164.16 165:14 165:15165:16 166: 17 167:25 171:11 171:25 172:2 172: 15 175:1 175:6 176:14 177:2 177:5 178:21 178:24 178:25 179:18 180:15 182:4 164:7 188:9 199:6 199:17 200: 7 200:14 200:18 201:16 201:18 201: 19 202:10 202:12 202:15 203:7 203: 20 203:22 203:25 204:2 204:2 204:5 204:5 204:6 205:6 205:11 205:16 205:18 206:19 206:21 207:7 207:15 207:17 207:24 208:13 208:14 208:16 200:4 209:13 209:14 210:10 210:21 211:0 211:11 211:18 211:21 212:10 213:10 213:20 213:25 214:6 214:23 216:4 216:8 217:4 217:21 218:6 218: 9 218:20 218:21 225:3 225:9 225:24 226:10 226:17 228:15 Energy-efficient [1)100:19 Energy-related y] 35:14

nergy-savlng [1] 97:14 Energy-using [1] 95:3 Enforce (1) 92:3 Enforcement [1] 193:6 Engage (1) 79:3 Engagement [21187:19 188:7 Engine [1] 33:14 Engineer [1] 132:4 Engineering (1) 96:14

Engineers (1) 06:16 English

-niw?2 Enhance [3)15:9 24:5 24:6 Enhanced (1) 20:22 En)oyed [1)114:11 Enjoying [2)40:18 173:10 Enlighten [1] 191:19 Enormous [5) 123:11 162:21 175:10 175:14 193 Enronomlcs [3) 228:7 228:9 229:6 Ensurs [2] 84:23 102:4 Enterprises [1)81:14 Enthused [2)21:17 21:18 Entire [6] 75:20 176:7 210:4 221:21 232:5 »5:18 Entirely [4)26:7 77:10 77:11 102:20 Entities P) 92:18 227:13 Entitlements [1] 93:7 Environment [3)37:164:21 170:21 Environmental [26] 2:9 2:12 7:12 10:2 23:15 29:12 29:13 34:18 66:6 67:24 68:15 87:4 87:8 100:19 100:20 103:23 170:14 175:10 175:15 175:22 194:11 194:23 201:7 208:20 212:5 Environomy [1] 100:23 EPA [12] 29:15 29:24 30:24 31:14 34:4 36; 23 37:1 37:5 75:6 77:2 201:11 222:5 EPRI [1) 19:22 Equal [1] 97:17 Equalize [1)93:12 Equally [1] 10:21 Equates [1)210:19 Equation [8] 64:7 102:2 105:1 107:18 118:21 147:16172:21 179:3 Equations [1) 108:6 Equipment [4] 81:12 133:16 133:17 133:16 Equitable [1)221:23 Equivalence [2)77:18112:12 Equivalencies [1] 172:6 Equivalerwy [2] 126:13 126:16 Equivalent (12) 31:8 31:10 126:25 126:4 126:4 126:7 126:11 126:13 126:19 126:21 127:4 127:7 ER [1] 203:14 Era [1] 14:21 ERC [1] 27:22 ERC's [1] 203:23 Erode [1] 48:22 Eroding (1) 48:24 Erosion [3)8:12 170:25171:1 Eros I on-rate-based

[1]171:1 Error [I) 17:6 Escaped [1)72:18 Especially [6] 6:6 42:12 72:6 96:24 98:18 203:2 Essence [1)106:13 Essentially ( I I ) 49:12 104:23 111:12 208:15 210 11 210:22 211:21 212:7 212:13 227: 12 227:15 Establish ri) 92:3 Established [6) 14:4 14:7 42:11 66:5 191:24 208:

Estimate [6) 28:15 31:21 33:25 96:13 160:22 204:12 I Estimated | [4)34:4 34:6 62:16 204:17 Estimates | [17] 28:14 28:19 29:17 30:15 31:1 32; 2 32:11 32:12 32:13 32:16 34:11 34: 24 200:18 200:20 201:10 203:10 222: 4 Estimations (1) 36:7 Et (2) 109:5 228:7 Ethanol (22) 51:25 74:24 75:2 77 3 77:3 77:4 77:6 77:7 126:15 126:161126:17 126: 20 126:21 126:22 126:24 164:2 164: 5 164:8 164:15 164:18 164:20 165:21 Ethical [1] 164:3 Euro [1)156:18 Europe [2)212:8 227:16 European [6] 21:5 23:5 24:25 92:12 212:14 Evaluate [1) 194:6 Evaluated (1) 201:17 Evaluating [1) 30:13 Evaluation [1] 5:10 Evaporation [4)52:7 52:10 52:16 52:19 Event [2] 150:0 219:16 Events [2)18:22 213:11 Eventually [6)18:17 56:3107:17171:11 191:22 229:17 Everyday [1)168:12 Everywhere [1] 180:6 Evidence P) 40:14 40:1641:7 Evident [1)9:10 Evoke [1] 148:4 Evolution [1)173:12 Evolve [1] 183:24 Evolved (1)229:18 Ewa [1)117:20 Exact [1)144:15 Exactly [8] 63:16 153:16 166:12 211:20 214: 18 215:13 228:9 229:20 I Examine | [4)41:7 51:18 80:15 229:19 Examined I

Ti!]m:9 224:10 Example [44] 12:21 32:10 61:14 62:20 69:4 72: 21 73:17 74:11 74:23 76:12 85:6 95: 1 95:6 96:7 97:11 98:4 101:5 110:17 111:22 112.9 122:23 140:10 140.21 151:22 155:26 157:16 157:24 172:25 179:12 179:14 192:7 195:2 196:15 199:7 201:25 207:10 208:7 211:25 212:8 213:10 215:23 220:18 222:4 227:16 Examples [2)71:20136:24 Exceed [3)39:11 83:4160:12 Exceeds [1] 52:16 Excellent [21127:21 172:17 Except p) 63:8 144:20 182:1 Excess [3)18:16 97:21 99:11 Exchange (3)23:23 228:20 232:13 Excise [1] 103:20 Excited 12] 139:23 177:12 Exciting [1] 169:6 Excluded [1)58:17 Excludes [ I ] 100:16 Excuse [ I I ] 24:8 29:9 38:22 39:5 41:17 61: 23 67:4 63:19 110:8 159:12 210:25 Execute [11214:13 Executive [1)3:6 Exercise [1)25:11 Exhausted II) 158:22 Exhaustive [21101:10191:10 Exhibits [21235:20 235:20 Exist P) 60:11 69:11 180:8 Existing [6) 65:13 104:3 135:5 196:17 199:16 20>:19 Exists [2)70:5181:17 Expand [1] 101:8 Expanding [2] 35:23 74:25 Expands (1) 40:4 Expansion [3] 42:24 44:3 80:4 Expect [10) 18:1 32:3 51:2 61:3 70:24 79:26 80:2 80:4 80:9 148:6 Expectations [1] 182:1 Expected [2] 40:8 132:24 Expedite [1] 235:6 Expeditiously (1) 79:6 Expense [1] 180:21 Expensive [12110:6 106:14 119:7 133:12 133: 14 137:2 137:2 167:19 161:2 181:7 164:7166.24 Experience [11) 45:25 49:9 63:1 58:6 92:11 106: 18 110:22 118:16 143:3 145:2 191:15 Experienced [2)39:23 173:14 Experiences

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/8 I W [1] 206:1 Experiencing [7)39:7 41:11 41:13 43:20 47:25 56: 9 173:1 Expert (1) 112:10 Experts (3) 28:23 37:5 206:8 Explain [2] 34:5 34:9 Explaining (1)213:9

[2)194:15194:17 Exploit [1)80:14 Explore [1] 147:24 Explored [1)196:16 Exponentially [2] 172:13 172:15 Exported [1] 31:22 Exporting [1)144:17 Express ri) 54:13 Expressly [1) 83:25 Extend [1] 42:2 Extendable (1) 176.7 Extends P l 42:7 43:8 Extent IS) 95:22 204:9 204:23 224:11 230:7 Externalities [2)72:20100:25 Extra r n 132:7 142:3 144:20 160:19 161:3 161:10 162:19 Extract [6] 42:1 160:21 161:8 161:11 161:16 165:12 Extracted [1] 166:1 Extraordinary [1] 65:25 Extreme [1] 149:1 Extremely [3] 42:3 42:14 70:16 Extremes (1) 18:20 Exxon [1] 69:12 Eye [1)88:10 Eyes [2] 142:25 186:1

Face [4)24:23 101:1 101:13 217:5 Facilitate (2)133:20 134:13 Facilitating [1)208:13 Facilities [3)49:6 107:23 111:11 Facility [6] 49:14 49:17 77;19 81:5 132:7 202; 11 Facing [3)95:21 97:22142:16 Fact [22119:24 21:10 32:22 41:17 49:11 58:22 60:6 61:11 63:23 83:2 129:1 133:22 149:7 150:2 159:20 159:23 162:4 172:7 172:24 194:14 198:22 203:4 Factor (11 215.4 Factors [11] 14:22 31:12 31:16 32:12 112:14

117:4 190:23190:24 213:19 215:6 227:15 Facts [1] 158:9 Fahrenheit [2)11:1711.18 Fails [1)133:16 Fair [4] 24:17 24:21 24:23 229:5 Fairiy [3)28:20149:21 165:6 Faith [1] 22:13 Fall [4] 83:17 84:18 109:11 109:11 Falling [1)141:3 Falls [1] 45:7 Familiar [4122:12 27:17 47:22190:4 Famous 12)112:10 212:1 Fan [3] 116:4 142:16 142:19 Fans [4] 136:6 142:18 142:18 142:20 Fantastic [1] 38:15 Far (16) 28:24 32:20 42:2 50:17 53:23 63; 15 63:17 99:17 108:16 151:6 158:9 175:2 179:5 182:2 185:14 189:13 197:20 197:22 Farm [2] 108:19 216:7 Farmer [3)144:19 144:21 144:21 Fam>3 [2] 79:23 79:24 Fascinating [1] 185:25 Fashion [2)21:10 21:19 Fast [41128:6165:10184:8 206:2 Faster [4114:23 51:1 106:2 205:23 Fate (1)77:25 Faulty [1] 75:12 Favor [1)81:1 Favorite (5) 20:1 82:15145:19 145:22 167:19 Fax [1] 235:16 Fear P] 57:6 57:7 Feasible [2)189:18 224:9 Features ri) 97:24 Federal [8] 54:22 105:23 134:4 135:9 199:14 214:11 227:10 228:3 Fee (1) 209:21 Feeble (1)221:10 Feed [3)46.4 144:20166:5 Feed-In [11] 206:21 211:20 211:20 212:1 212: 8 212:8 212:9 212:14 212:16 212:18 212:21 Feedback (2) 6:17 55:7 Feedbacks [2)11:23 18:15 Feeds [_2] 46:4 166:2 Feedstock [5] 2:19 115:3 126:24 159:9 182:6 Feelings

[3)ig:1513B::!21&H:9 Fees (1) 112:25 Feet P) 17:1 45:21 170:24 Fell [1] 232:2 Felt [2] 72:2 196:5 Fer [1)113:13 Few (23) 5:17 7:17 7:24 21:22 29:5 36:10 38:18 38:24 39:19 44:15 45:21 46:19 55:22 63:21 67:2 79:22 83:3 91:19 119:2 142:8 191:9 201:3 232:6 Fewer [3)41:6 41:6 149:8 Fiber [2)143:15 143:16 Fiction [1)13:5 Field [3] 28:24 87:12 216:11 Fields [2] 75:8 86:1 Fifth p ] 84:23 88:4 167:14 Fifties [1)12:4 Fifty [11141:19 Rght (1) 167.23 f i gu re [12] 82:7 95:25 96:16 104:10 163:4 164:15 184:16 191:16 192:24 224:16 227:14 228:1 Filed (11 232:19 Filed: Sign (1) 23^:24 Fill [1] 5:11 Fill ing [21115:12164:24 Film [1] 67:11 Films [1] 69:16 Filter [2110:8 142:4 Final (10)4:13 9:8 9:817:21 25:7 38:1 61: 25 90:15 159:2 188:4 Finally [12) 8:10 24:16 85:18116:25 127:4 147:18 148:11 153:7 153:25154:23 156:19 158:18 Finance [1] 134:10 Financing (1)214.15 Findings [2] 28:21 200:19 Fine [21103:11 108:24 Fingers [1] 50:9 Finished [2)38:19 147:7 Fire P) 38:3 153:18 183:25 Fired (1)161:20 Firing [1)122:11 Firmly [1] 79:2 Firms [3)92:9 93:12 101:1 First P6] 4:10 7:8 7:15 7:17 7:19 8:1 6:8 8:15 0:16 14:6 22:4 25:2 27:2 29:16 30:19 32:11 32:15 39:18 50:17 55:9 58:18 65:5 68:9 77:10 70:12 87:13 61:6 99:21 99:22 105:22109:24 114: 1 114:1 128:16 130:8 130:11 132:3

133:1 133:1 133:2133:4133:9133: 22 134:7 134:25 135:2 137:8 137:24 137:25 140:2 140:3 140:4 147:25 148:17 153:4 167:11 168:11 168:11 168:12 176:15 177:19 183:25 188:13 190:17 193:7 201:5 207:5 210:17 218:19 219:21 219:24 219:25 222:14 224:2 231:12 Fll (1) 167:21 Fits [2)167:23 228:6 Five [1814:7 32:1 67:23 98:17 114:3 121: 18 122:16 139:5 145:9 168:16 180: 10 217:19 217:20 217:20 217:21 217: 23 218:4 210:7 Fix (1) 109:5 Fixed (2)98:10 207:14 Flash II] 100:23 Flashlight [1)8:24 Flat p) 10:15 97:3 Fleet [1] 82:19 Fletcher [13)2:7 8:11 36:1 36:10 38:12 52:11 64:13 66:22 68:4 58:6 69.12 63:5 63: 20 Flex [1] 96:22 Ffexibillty [1] 222:18 Flexible [1] 109:22 Flight [11106:23 Flood [2)47:19185:8 Flooding nn 46:25 46:3

[2] 65:24177:5 Florida [31216:1 216:7 217:25 Ffow p ] 101:16138:10 Flows [1] 102:4 Fluctuations [1] 25:2 Fluorescent

81:12 135:16 143:25 168:22 181: g 181:10 213:10 213:13 Fluorescents

133:1 160:24 167:3 179:25 213:6 lux

[1] 66:4 Focus 13] 21:25 30.16 38:2074:6 01:5 112:

i 1 116:16 128:8 142:9 167:2 189:3 189:4 204:15 Focused [8] 29:10 29:11 30:6 30:8 35:23 61:8 90:9 188:26 Focusing [2)21:24 64:2 Focussing (1) 208:18 Folk [1] 10:15 Folks [21] 5:7 5:11 110:23 114:8 114:12 148:22 149:2 149:6 149:9 151:18 152:14 154:3 154:6 154:20 155:14 168:9 160:3 187:14 188:5 220:15 232:8 Folllcley [1] 8:23 Follow [01 25:14 68:13 68:24 165:7 164:20

Follow-up [1] 214:24

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/1 Followed [2] 129:12 214:5 Fol lowing [3114.7134.20 202:13 Follows [1] 155:9 Food [7163:10 71:6 71:8 05:1 149:19 187: 6 220:6 Foodstock [1] 63:8 Foot [4] 45:13 47:18 144:6 144:7 Footprint [8] 110:4 110:4 110:9 111:1 111:2 129:4 226:12 227:18 Force [201 21:11 79:2 79:20 64:21 69:2 91: 22 91:24 92:6 94:18 99:13 189:20 191:1 102:12 102:20 103:1 193:9 193:10 195:20 224:21 224:24 Forced [D 52:14 Forces (1) 40:1 Forcing [6114:17 31:4 75:1 112:23 112:24 Forcings [2)16:315:15 Forecasts [1] 190:9 Foregoing [3)234:8 214:11234:13 Foreseeable [1] 106:23 Forest [3] 81:20 85:6 94:11 Forestry (1) 94:12 Forests [4)15:11 65:23 72:1 80:8 Forget [4) 85:19 136:8 166:25 184:24 Forgive r i ) 229:20 Form [9] 6:10 43:18 101:24 102:6 116:13 122:9176:21 204:4 209:8 Forma p ] 211:12 211:16 Format (1)4:25 Formation [1189:2 Formations ra) 20:17 20:21 104:17 Formed [3)16:6138:18184:5 Former [IJ 72:9 Forms [4] 69:24 116:25 189:20 231:13 Formulas [2] 30:23 30:24 Formulate [1] 6:19 Formulat ion (1)113:6 Forth [1)199:11 Fortunate [1)184:24 Fortunately (1) 146:24 Forum [6] 3:10 7:13 114:18 114:25 146:15 196:17 Forward [16] 5:25 6:3 6:8 8:9 6:19 7:5 81:6 92:2 132:16 133:11 134:9 168:23 177:19 181:15 198:1 201:3 Forward-looking [1)198:1 Forwards [1) 106:2 Nossil [40] 14:15 17:16 19:6 33:2 35:25 61:

10146:4161:1164:1172:4 22!>:25 226:13 Fulfll l (1] 40.13 Full (12) 3:5 3:10 4:15 79:20 04:10 86:5 97:9 97:18 97:22 100:24 157:25 235: 18 Fully [3)29:24 78:19 80:1 Fumes [1] 72:22 Fun [4)146:23 166:21 187:1187:1 Function [1) 118:20 Functional [2)34:12199:12 Functions [3] 36:4 199:5 203:24 r u n d P) 176:19 200:4 208:5 Fundamental [1] 29:1 Fundamentally [1] 56:8 Funded [5] 29:24 34:14 63:23 69:12 203:3 Funding |

S 13:0 30:2 54:10 54:10 54:20 54: 201:13 I

Funds I [31134:11176:21 177:21 Future I [39] 2:19 13:19 13:22 17:3 16:12 25: 10 36.4 43:12 44.14 40.10 53-.11 55: 4 56:12 70:4 80:11 80:18 68:14 108: 23 108:15 109:0 100:9 115:3 117:25 110:17 146:4 153:25 157:5 157:9 169:9 159:19 167:7 167:11 171:10 171:11 173:4 182.18 185:6 195:9 207:24 Future's (11108:23

P?.

6 611:8 70:1 70:11 70:14 70:15 70:16 70:17 70:18 71:14 71:15 75:13 76:22 76:23 77:11 77:12 79:5 83:9 64:3 84: 11 102:23 105:25 110.19 111:19 112: I 112:5 112:9 112:12 112:14 116:12 124:10 125:24 128:12 140:10 172:4 Fossil-effic lent [1] 102:23 Fossil-fuel-intensive [1] 70:16 Foundation (2)30:18172:20 Foundations (1) 68:22 Four p2) 4:8 7:16 15:8 16:1 63:9 64:11 64; 12 67:23 68:4 79:23 83:25 107:15 113:13 123:13 156:4 163:23 184:25 206:12 206:20 206:25 210:16 216:11 Four-fer-one (1)113:13 Foxtrot [1] 199:22 Fraction M] 154:8 Fragile (1)86:15 Fram [1] 10:5 Frame (3)67:8121:13 224:10 Framework [10] 30:4 30:12 56:24 194:15 196:1 196:1 196:7 200:9 200:15 224:8 Francisco [1116:13 Frankly [8] 22:12 22:16 48:18 49:3 164:2 166: 21 201:1 206:15 Fraud [1113.2 Free [2)10:3 65:1 Freedman (13) 2:22 188:11 188:12 188:17 188: 19 188:21 223:18 224:2 224:7 225: 13 225:22 230:8 231:7 Frequent [1] 16:23 Frequently [2] l60:14 160:14 Fresh p ] 59:20 164:4 Freshwater [6] 59:11 69:14 60:7 60:16 60:19 60: 20 Friday [6] 1:15 146:24 234:7 235:4 235:10 235:12 Friend (1)8:10 Frog [1] 72:1 F rom-the-cradle-to-the-g rave [1] 124:7 Front [1] 48:23 Fruit m 129:20 129:24 130:6 138:21 218:

Frustration (1)103:13 Fuel [54] 31:22 33:7 33:15 33:16 33:19 36: 17 62:17 62:23 69:8 70:1 70:15 70: 16 70:18 70:18 71:14 76:22 76:23 77: I I 77:12 79:6 82:3 82:4 82:5 84:3 64: 11 85:1108:7 106:8 108:11 107:20 110:16 110:19 112:1 112:5 112:9 112:12 112:15 124:10 124:12 124:25 125:24 128:12 141:19 164:4 164:9 164:21 165:4 167:3 167:5 167:12 212:3 229:13 229:17 229:24 Fuel-switching (1) 107:20 Fuels [23] 17:16 31:22 31:23 31:23 33:3 36: 25 61:6 70:12 70:14 71:15 75:13 63: 10 105:25 111:19 116:12 130:16 140:

G8

2)61:15 adsen

[2)187:13167:15 Gain [1] 72:3 Gaining (2)39:6165.15 Gal (1) 54:16 Gallon [4)19:8 73:21 77:4 142:1 Gallons I (4)60:18 60:19 126:19126:22 Gallup

g) 146:18 ame

(2)138:9 221:4 Gap

8) 120:21 arbaga

(2) 107-20 161:23 Garbage-to-energy (1) 107:20 Gary [1612:2510:17 10:17 16:5 16:517: 18 20:11 54:4 54:6 54:7 66:23 67:7 67:20 231:11 231:16 235:13 Gary's I [2] 54:2 99:20 { Gary [email protected] [1] 235:17 j Gas I [100] 2:3 2:5 2:22 3:19 3:23 4:2 4:13 7:25 8:2 8:16 6:19 10:12 10:24 11:6 11:11 11:21 20:23 21:8 26:15 26:17 26:20 26:7 28:9 28:19 29:17 29:19 32:14 33:1 36:17 35:20 36:3 36:24 37:2 63:17 65:4 55:12 62:10 64:15 66:4 76:3 76:4 75:9 76:3 76:18 78:25 79:7 82:1 82:10 84:2 84:24 86:4 86: 2188:25 89:1 111:13 112:20 114:3


115:24116:13116:22124:6124:10 126:2 128:23 129:15 141:20 142:5 156:23160:25161:1161:2 161:16 166:5 166:12 166:14 166:24 175:11 175:16 179:1 168:18 169:19 194:9 195:5 197:4 199:13 200:1 200:16 200:25 201:5 201:10 201:25 202:2 202:15 203:8 203:10 204:11 209:5 217:19 221:20 221:22 Gases P3111:6 11:9 11:15 11:10 12:1 12: 24 22:1 30:17 31:3 31:13 55:6 65:18 73:2 73:4 74:6 74:18 76:2 77:13 77: 16 79:18 102:11 190:22 190:24 192: 17 193:15 204:10 208:5 206:9 206: 14 223:25 224:1 224:5 224:6 Gasoline [6] 33:1 102:22 102:25 103:20 124: 25166:21 Gate (1)16:13 Gather [1] 189:22 Gathered [1] 86:2 Gathering [1] 190:8 Gene [1] 182:20 Gene-spliced g] 182:20

eneral [9] 28:11 31:8 53:6 66:6 81:17 89:11 103:20168:24 207:3 Generalized [1)215:18 Generally [5] 29:3 32:8 211:3 214:12 215:2 Generate [3)33:7 97:14 216:3 Generated [3)90:5135:20135:21 Generates [1] 215:25 generat ing M] 97:21 Generation [23] 12:21 19:7 33:6 35:15 81:2 81:3 00:8 96:1 95:0 96:11 95:20 95:22 96: 26 105:10 109:4 125:18 128:12 132: 8 133:4 183:7 184:21 187:6 209:25 Generations [2)68:14187:10 Generator [2)97:11 214:5 Oenerators [2) 33:2 96:25 Genetic [1] 182:22 Genetically

g)181:22 eography

Geologic p ] 40:14 40:16 Geological [1] 20:12 Geology p) 2:8 38:2 38:10 Geophysical (1) 12:5 Geophysics [3) 2:8 38:2 38:10 George [1] 21:12 Geothermal (5) 80:6 116:17 116:18 207:17 226:24 Gemiany [31105:11156:17 211:25 GHG [312:16115:8 168:3 Gigantic [11208:15 Gigawatt [11216:12 Gmawatts' [1] 20:3 Giggles

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/ m [1127:12 Giri [1] 88:9 Gist [1)15:2 Giveaway [116:23 Given [14] 7:2 26:13 35:19 42:12 45:2 49: 24 52:17 56:5 110:19 145:22 184:10 185.12198:23 202.13 Glaciers (2)43:18 43:19 Glad [IJ 76:7 Glass [2)143:12 143:12 Glimmer [1] 172:21 Global [55) 3:18 3:25 4:3 5:22 6:25 6:3 9:11 9:12 14:2216:316:1131:1 31:5 31:7 39:10 39:12 39:21 39:25 40:1 42:25 43:21 43:23 43:25 44:9 44:12 44:13 53:6 54:9 54:12 57:13 69:8 69:11 76: 19 78:21 78:24 90:1 101:6 101:13 101:18 113:1 117:4 148:19 153:10 153:20 153:22 155:20 156:23 158:15 158:16 159:18 160:13 170:12 172:12 183:8 197:12 Globally [3] 94:2 149:22 162:3 Globe (5) 51:6 53:6 65:8 149:24 150:4 Glued [1)186:2 GMO [2)182:20 182:20 Goal [3)54:22 56:24 112:22 Goals 6) 22:14 22:20 23:16 30:4 56:10 87:

Governments [3)68:2189:24131:3 Governor [5] 189:8 202:6 219:22 220:7 220:20 Governor's [2)27:23 204:13 Grabbed [1)22:7 Grad [1] 120:6 Grade [2)96:15 167:14 Graders [1) 88:6 Gradually [1) 92:20 Graduate [1] 195:6 Graduates [1] 196:6 Grail (1) 165:9 Grandchildren [1] 10:8 Grandfather (1) 174:20 Grandparents [1] 83:21 Grant (5) 29:14 29:21 29:22 30:23 208:5 Granted [1)11:11 Grants P) 29:16 178:21 201:11 Graph [5] 13:20 16:1 96:3 130:20 156:12 Graphic (1)41:10 Graphs [1] 36:12 Grasslands (1) 65:23 Grave [2)113:1124:7 Gravel [1)49:15 Gray [2)17:5 217:17 Great [44] 54:15 58:23 66:13 67:18 68:20 75:5 78:6 79:4 81:2 62:22 62:25 84:1 85:18 86:12 88:13 86:14 86:25 99:1 99:3 121:15 122:13 136:12 137:11 142:24 146:2 146:7 151:22 163:24 164:22 165:5 170:10 179:14 180:15 185:17 187:21 187:22 202:4 213:2 213:4 213:5 217:20 217:21 217:23 223:20 Greater m 43:2 62:7 73:5 102:23 129:22 131; 21 132:2 Greatest [4)32:21 33:4 48:11 171:14 Greatly [1] 232:12 Greed [1] 164:23 Green [66] 5:5 46:13 70:21 70:25 71:15 77: 7 99:21 148:8 149:5 168:8 184:10 184:19 206:19 206:20 207:9 207:12 207:13 207:13 207:19 207:22 207:24 208:15 209:12 209:24 210:7 210:10 211:2 211:6 211:18 212:10 212:23 213:20 213:24 215:22 215:23 217:6 217:10 217:12 217:14 217:16 217:22 217:23 217:25 218:1 218:1 218:4 216:7 218:11 218:12 218:12 216:16 216:15 218:21 225:3 225:9 225:16 225:23 226:10 227:5 227:7 227:20 228:6 228:14 228:18 228:21 229:4 Greenhouse (115) 2:3 2:5 2:22 3:19 3:23 4:2 4:13 7:25 8:1 6:16 8:19 10:12 10:24 10:25 11:811:811:11 11:1611:21 11:25 21:7 22:1 26:15 26:17 26:20 28:7 28: 9 28:19 29:17 29:10 30:17 32:14 35: 17 35:20 36:3 36:24 37:2 53:17 55:4 55:12 62:10 64:15 65:4 65:18 73:2

, 73:4 74:8 74:18 75:3 /5:4 75:9 76:2 76:3 77:13 77:16 70:25 79:7 79:17 82:1 62:10 84:2 84:24 06:4 88:21 88: 25 89:1 102:10111:12 112:20114:3 115:24 116:13 124:6 124:10 126:2 175:11 175:16 179:1 188:16 189:3 169:10 189:12 169:19 190:20 190:22 190:24 192:17 193:15 195:5 196:8 197:4 199:13 200:1 200:18 200:25 201:5 201:10 201:25 202:2 202:15 203:8 203:10 204:10 204:11 206:5 208:9 206:14 221:20 221:22 223:25 224:1 224:4 224:6 224:13 230:16 Greening [2)81:18 85:12

Greenland (19) 16:2518:17 38:23 39.1 40:2 41 10 41:13 41:21 41:23 42:5 43:23 67 10 57:22 58:1 58:18 69:20 69:21 69 22 69:24 Greg (1) 50:5 Grid [12] 97:25 109:17 121:7 121:13 122: 22 123:22 211:22 212:5 214:3 215:2 216:24 217:5 Gross (2) 19:14 62:17 Ground (8) 33:9 35:15 59:15 59:16 76:9 124: 21149:22 165:3 Groundwater [2)59:24 171:7 Group [22] 1:6 3:8 6:13 6:14 6:18 6:21 28:4 38:14 38:19 63:25 85:25 66:7 90:15 90:25 155:15 155:16 184:5 232:6 232:8 232:18 235:3 235:9 Groups (4)88:7 142:9186:14 221:19 Grow [11] 41:6 73:17 73:18 73:23 83:22 88 10 90:11 112:10145:7164:4165:12 Growing [6112:13 51:15 73:19 164:22 172:13

Grown [1)31:19 Growth [11] 31:21 33:5 34:6 104:21 104:22 130:24 172:11 172:21 173:1 173:8 173:16 Guaranteed [1] 144:24 Guess [17) 56:17 66:4 90:18 100:7 110:3 118:7 174:23 175:5 176:1 181:13 187:6 193:2 197:2 219:5 223:21 227: 22 229:9 Guessing (1) 223:18 Guests (1) 27:8 Guidance [3)88:21 199:13 199:19 Guide [1)214:22 Guidelines [1] 90:5 Gulf [1] 150:8 Gut (1) 69:3 Guy [3)64:15 163:2 186:6 Guys [3)98.16 149:25 231:10 Guzzlers [1)166:12 GWP [1)32:12

"ii Golden (1) 16:13 Gonna (114] 4:18 8:14 8:23 9:24 10:3 10:7 10:10 10:13 13:22 14:11 16:12 17:19 18:23 20:10 20:25 21:14 21:15 22:19 22:21 25:17 25:24 26:5 26:14 28:25 37:15 38:6 46:9 46:24 46:19 48:22 49:18 50:8 51:11 51:25 53:10 54:15 64:17 56:21 58:23 59:1 59:4 61:19 65:20 66:9 66:16 70:12 70:13 81:20 85:23 86:24 90:17 92:1 93:16 102:1 106:25 107:22 107:22 107:23 114:15 123:19 127:23 130:11 130:11 130:21 132:13 134:20 139:17 140:2 146:15 161:8 151:7 151:7 153:8 153:16 153; 19 161:23 183:25 184:10 164:15 169: 10 171:8 171:7 176:1 180:2 183:3 187:18189:12 189:16191:1 191:17 192:4 194:6 197:13 201:3 206:0 223; 0 223:21 223:22 223:22 224:12 224: 20 224:21 224:23 226:2 230:8 230:9 230:14 230:18 230:25 231:3 231:3 231:7 232:16 232.17 Good-sized [1)81:5 Goodness [1)51:8 Goods [21179:18179:20 Goodwill [3] 208:20 212:5 228:15 Google [1] 167:20 Gore [21154:3 165:11 Gorilla [1] 179:16 Government (161 2:23 30:9 54:22 60:10 61:11 61: 13 61:13 166:11 166:18 173:3 185:1 190:7199:2 199:15 212:21 Govemment's P l 27:16 61:12 199:6 Governmental [1] 58:24

H H-Power [3180:12 95:1 178:16 Habit [21150:22151:18 Habits

IECO IRP Techtiical Session; 6/ [I1j-83:24 Haiku [212:22188:17 Hair 11)7:21 Half P l ) 5:3 14:15 16:21 25:4 43:22 44:4 44:6 45:1 45:2 45:3 48:9 47:21 46:10 83:1 94:25 95:8 107:16 124:21 128:6 162:6169:18 Halfway [2) 05:8 95:9 Halves (1) 143:6 Hamakua r i ] 60:0 Hamnett [4)2:2 3:2 3:6 188:6 Hand [9) 10:2 30:22 30:22 83:2 99:2 106: 14160:5187:15 203:4 Handful

R) 208:11 andle

R] 101:11 andout

R ] 232:24 andouts 15:8 ands

67:1 66:23 67:15 67:17 137:20 6:23 177:7

Handwriting 1112:18179:7 andy

1] 154:16 ang

2)25:13 232:4 angina

6] 129:26 129:24 130:5 136:21 218: 232:9

Hansen

E] 61:10 153:11 ansen'e

M)18:4 Happy [1] 163:13 Harbor [3)48:2 48:7 60:4 Harbors [2163:6 63:12 Hard [6] 13:19 35:3 53:9 96:25 139:21 167: IHarder [1] 145:25 Hardship [1] 97:21 Hannn [11147:9 Hamessed 1) 146:1

Harnessing [1)83:18 Hashiro (10) 2:25 16:5 67:10 169:12 231:11 231:16 231:20 235:13 236:19 235:20 Hated [D 133:6 Hats J4] 7:20 7:20 7:23 28:13 Have/have [1)101:23 Have/have-not

fl ] 101:23 l a w a i i

[100] 1:17 1:24 3:7 3:18 4:11 8:7 7: 23 8:8 8:11 8:12 10:19 17:22 22:24 29:20 26:15 26:16 27:21 28:19 29:20 31:23 33:24 34:1 34:7 37:2 38:7 45: 10 50:19 51:14 52:24 64:12 63:0 63: 26 64:5 64:8 64:15 64:24 66:16 67: 23 71:21 71:21 73:20 76:25 79:4 81: 18 82:12 83:19 85:11 85:11 85:12 85: 21 06:9 87:22 91:10 91:19 98:16 101; 13 101:22 104:14 105:7 106:8 105: 19 106:13 108:11 108:12 109:15109: 17 113:10 114:20 115:14 128:11 129:

6 129:16129:22133:13133:21 138: 3 140:8 140:15 149:18 155:16 156: 11 159:3 165:4 182:3 182:12 182:14 189:12 200:12 202:2 202:22 205:16 216:16 216.24 217:5 221:24 227:6 231:22 234:1 234:6 234:19 Hawai'i 's [7] 27:19 29:24 32:14 116:10 200:9 200:14 201:12 Hawaii [18] 1:6 2:4 2:5 2:9 2:16 8:20 26:21 60:14 100:2 111:10 114:15 115:10 169:10 180:8 202:9 235:2 235:8 235: 15 Hawaii's

Kl] 2:5 2:7 26:20 38:9 awallan

[10] 2:11 3:15 3:22 4:5 5:14 5:20 7:1 46:19 70:10 70:15 188:5 207:2 210: 13 210:15 216:16 218:11 231.13 232; 14 235:13 Hazardous [1] 63:13 lazards

[1189.10

M

H;

K

Gf P) 91:7 191:24 230:21 Head [4)8:35112:4124:18101:12 Heading [1] 163:12 Health [4)68:5189:25191:2 230:5 Health's i l ] 29:9 Hear [13] 8:3 55:3 55:6 55:11 74:15 75:12 104:16 114:8 133:23 158:6 188:19 188:23 205:14 Heard [13] 23:6 27:10 28:22 31:6 36:7 55:5 91:9 107:6 146:25 147:3 150:23 163: 2 199:21 Hearing m 6:23 48:17 116:13 160:5 174:6 187:4188:21233:3 Hearing's j l ) 176:13 Hearings ri) 13:1 Heart m 149:23 Heart-string [1] 149:23 Heat 6] 11:6 11:7 95:2 117:2 135:19 161: \'}

Heater

R) 07:5 135:8 eaters

[2] 96:3 06:6 Heating [14] 39:24 39:24 42:22 44:6 44:21 117:1 118:14125:14127:5 127:0 129:12129:14129:16 166:20 Heavier [1] 157:19 Heavily [2)69:12 217:2 Heavy P) 161:3 178:14

(20) 2:25 26:7 27:2 28:5 37:16 38:13 64:3 68:7 71:3 74:12 67:14 90:24 104:6 110:3 110:6 135:10 205:3 219: 16 220:16 235:13 HECO'S [5] 26:3 26:18 28:23 64:1 125:23 Helen (1) 153:2 Hell [1] 153:11 Hello [2)168:19 198:10 Help P5] 3:22 30:3 64:14 66:12 101:18 113:8 113:10 128:9 134:1 134:12 157:9 157:14 177:24 184:6 187:9 206:5 206:14 207:15 207:24 208:9

208:23 298:24 209:14 209:22 210:/ 210:10 211:18 212:23 213:12 214:11 214:17 214:20 216:4 227:20 232:3 Helped 12] 91:2 212:13 Helpers (1) 34:19 Helping [8] 6:21 85:13 209:25 211:15 213:22 216:22 217:22 224:25 Helps [5] 129:25 145:7 207:19 211:16 216:

Hemisphere [1)12:13 Henry p l ) 2:10 6:17 10:18 67:24 68:8 68: 10 60:12 68:16 76:6 84:4 100:6 100: 11 100:15 100:25 106:5112:4 112: 16 115:23 124:4 197:6 108:21 Henry's [1] 68:9 Hereby (1) 234:6 Hermina [3] 2:12 66:1 87:7 HEVs 1] 126:14 Gl [41231:20 235:2 235:11 235:12 Hierarchy [2] 130:9 130:15 High pol 17:8 39:13 41:23 45:11 45:23 46: 4 46:7 46:11 46:20 46:23 47:18 47: 24 62:14 62:15 57:9 58:9 82:20 82: 24 96:24 108:21 119:1 131:19 132: 19 152:9 160:0 169:9 105:24 211:23 211:24 211:24 Higher (13117:10 31:3 40:22 40:23 51:5 60: 9 66:9 102:1 121:2 121:3 142:25 148: 10180:16 Highest [1] 129:14 Highlight [1] 190:17 Highlighted [2] 58:22 59:3 Highly [2] 58:25 143:8 Highway [2] 33:1 33:9 Hilo [11117:19 Hinteriand (1) 47:25 Historic

66:9 istory

m 7:24 10:22 43:9 43:9 43:13 43:15

Hit (6) 19:3 46:22 55:24 140:24 150:2 209:3 Hitting (1) 150:20 HNEI (1) 19:24 Hold [1] 22:7 Holes (1) 100:19 Hodstically [1] 74:7 Holy [1] 165:6 Home (17) 46:20 83.9 96:8 107:17 107:17 126:13 131:2 136:6 135:19 141:7 142:7 169:19 173:5 186:3 209:3 212: 13 232:1 Homeowner [11151:16 Homes [2)83:12107:15 Honest [3)196:20198:22 220:13

GI

Honolulu

fi).

[11)1:17 48:2 48:2 81:6115:14 123: 11 123:13 234:2 235:2 235:11 235:15 Honor f l ] 137:24 Hook j l ) 82:14 Hooser

K] 67:20 88:19 ops

(14) 16:25 38:15 60:8 106:20 106:21 114:11 127:16 137:20 144:8 164:10 167:14172:21 183:6189:2 Hopefully I

61:24 85:10 66:10 106:16 106:16 0:23173:12182:17 224:23

Horizon I 6] 31:4 40:9 40:11 40:12 41:9 45:7

Horns [1)91:18 Host p ] 9:20 155:1 176:3 Hosting

K16:11 219:15 Ot

[3)18:2019:20 142:2 Hotel [1] 160:18 Hotter M)43:1 Hour [18] 6:3 77:18 120:13 120:18 128:13 185:16 198:22 196:24 210:18 210:23 210:26 211:1 211:4 211:7 211:7 211: 25 226:5 220:18 I Hours I (8) 117:16 125:23 131:22 135:18 135: 18 168:23169:18 209:9 I House I [19] 2:12 78:3 87:3 87:7 80:22 97:25 133:6 142:16 152:4 153:16 189:3 189:7 189:10 190:21 191:7 101:22 193:6 230:3 230:16 Housekeeping p ] 66:19 66:22 66:22

[1] 164:6 Huge [14)10:7 56:13 73:24 126:25 135:16 161:11 173:8 173:8 179:23 180:5 180:22 182:7197:6 211:12 Human I [6] 30:15 99:3 143:2 148:13 155:1 172:12 Humans [1)154:18 Humid [1)61:4 Humidity i l ) 60:19 Hummers [3)157:10166:13166:18 Humor [5] 9:5 35:10 35:10 221:11 221:14 Hundred | [12] 7:1 16:7 31:4 71:5 71:5 155:22 167:20 170:24 171:15 171:17 179:16 185:15 Hundreds 11) 80:17 Hunger [1] 173:9 Hurdle [2)151:11 160:22 Hurdles [1)161:3 Hurricane [2)18:7 150:7 Hurricanes (3)18:6150:6170.5 Hybrid [1)82:23 Hybrids (3)141:22141:25157:19

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/ fiWr T1TT32 mportant [40] 5:19 5:23 11:20 24:17 32:6 34: 11 36:9 42:4 42:14 44:7 67:2 69:12 60.1 60:13 64:21 69:20 70:4 72:3 92: 1 92:6 92:7 93:2 94:10 97:18 103:21 116:12 117:17 121:17 143:2 146:10 149:16 152:16 154:17 170:22 172:7 191:6 203:16 203:25 212:24 214:1 Importantly [2)133:15 231: Imported [7) 35:25 35:25 77:5 126:1 126:19 144:14 181:23 Importing [2)49:15144:16 Impress [1] 99:6 Impressive [1)165:18 Improve [3)35:3 37:12 64:14 Improved [1)32:10 Improvements [2] 20:6 64:3 Improving [4] 36:16 36: fn-lleu-of [1] 228:21 inaccurate [1] 102:21 Inasmuch [1] 222:17 Inc 16) 1:6 2:11 78:15 235:2 235:8 235:13 Incandescent [3] 143:20 143:22 166:25 mcandescents

136:16 135:20 143:24 150:24 181:

201:15 203:13 207:7 215:13 217:15 217:16 220:15 224:15 224:21 231:21 231:22 232:1 232:2 232:13 232:16 inform ation-gathering (11190:6 Informative [1] 90:25 Informed 1) 54:2

Infrared [2)11:611:9 Infrastructure [3)14:7 47:22 177:24 Ingram t l) 153:2 ingredients

Hydro [3)76:18 80:17 227:1 Hydroelectric [1)118:20 Hydrogen 1)160:10

Hydroioglst

Hype P l 132:18 132:22

I ao [2] 60:7 60:11 Ice [36] 9:12 16:25 18:17 38:24 38:25 39; 2 39:6 40:2 40:22 41:10 41:13 41:15 41:1741:21 41:23 42:5 42:6 42:11 42:15 42:19 43:18 43:20 43:24 44:2 44:5 57:10 57:11 67:11 57:12 57:22 58:1 50:19 58:22 78:2 169:17 224:1 idea P2] 51:24 63:12 105:25 139:24 141: 13 142:14 147:25 148:6 148:17 153: 1 165:3155:11 157:11157.16160; 20 161:3 163:10 164:22 165:5 169: 16169:20180:23 Ideal [2)98:25154:19 Ideas [5] 6:10 158:4 191:9 191:17 193:17 fdentlflable [1] 02:20 Identifled (3)104:8194:10 224:18 Identifies r i ] 180:19 identify [10) 36:20 41:6 127:12 194:14 194: 16 207:6 223:24 224:3 224:12 224:12 Identifying [11190:6 Idle [1] 141:11 Idling [1)141:11 Ignore 2)113:10 154:18

Illustrate [2)35:12130:1 Illustrates [2)126:18130:20 Image I) 32:5 149:23

images II) 158:15 Imagine [4] 11:21 73:21 98:25 162:18 Immediately [4)46:9 56:8 222:18 222:19 Immensely 1) 86:7 Impact [32] 2:7 38:6 38:9 45:9 49:3 49:23 60: ^3 52:18 65:3 65:3 69:23 72:23 73:5 77:21 79:8 82:4 84:4 84:6 84:16 91: ID 91:12 100:13 124:4 128:13 140: 19 153:4 153:14 153:15 154:21 177: 9 185:7 194:11 Impacts (16) 64:6 73:14 74:3 74:5 76:16 84:1 84:2 100:1 111:7 113:2 113:10 153: 13 175:10 175:15 179:18 197:20 Implement m 69:4 92:2 131:2 193:13 197:25 fmplsmentation [5] 87:19 104:6 134:13 190:13 190: 15193:6 Implemented |3) 189:16 101:4 204:18 Implementing J2) 131:1 100:19 IrnplicaUon p ] 225:6 225:8 225:16 Implications 7] 2:9 4:11 16:24 66:18 67:22 68:14 00:2

importance

P„

:22

:23 64:7 64:22

\ ^

m incent [1] 228:2 incentive

84:14 85:16 92:10 120:22 176:23 :3 177:11 196:23

Incentives [15] 25:17 83:14 84:10 84:20 94:8 97: 16 97:20 97:22 101:8 102:5 134:1 134:23166:16 167:1176:21 incentivize [12) 94:11 95:1997:13 121:20 122:4 207:19 208:9 209:23 210:7 211:16 212:23 227:20 Incentivlzed [1] 96:22 inches [2116:14 144:1 Incineration M) 178:17 Incinerator 11)152:2 Incinerators [1] 179:6 Include [15)5:8 24:21 28:16 31:21 32:2547: 9 59:1 70:24 109:2 117:5123:25 124; 1 154:16 165:18 177:22 included [4)58:19 72:20102:21 194:8 includes [SJ 33:6 70:25 70:25 82:5 203:17 Including [5] 70:12 79:13 101:2 101:3 106:6 Income [3100:10 08:10166:23 Incompatible [1] 57:20 inconsistent ri) 66:22 Inconvenient [2)88:14185:12 Incorporate [4)32:12 108:14109:12 200:1 Incorporated [1] 49:17 Incorporating [5) 2:21 4:14 168:15 198:25 219:18

increase (27) 12:9 12:23 13:14 16:2 32:21 34: 3 36:13 37:8 41:22 59:25 70:17 85:3 96:19 106:11 119:20 120:7 120:16 121:3 159.25 160:15162:3 162:8 162:23 170:5 170:5 170:23 172:14 Increased (11) 14:18 20:2 33:10 33:21 34:1 74: 13 119:4 148:24 152:18 163:19 232: 12 Increases [17] 9:10 9:11 17:11 17:12 19:6 50: 24 52:9 60:1 84:18 106:1 107:20 119; 18 119:22 150:4 150:4 150:5 229:25 increasing [9] 14:16 17:25 35:23 54:20 54:20 54 25 102:25 171:8 226:4 Increasingly [2)111:7111:11 Incredible [1] 185:16 Incredibly (2)156:3 219:16 Incremental [1] 51:10 Independent [4)111:2 210:16 214:7 229:2 Independently [1) 69:14 Indiana r i ] 197:21 Indicated M) 56:18 Indicates [2] 39:6 40:0 Indicating [1)41:22 Indication [1] 228:25 Indigenous (1) 35:24 Indirectiy [2] 76:4 200:22 Individual [7] 6:25 36:21 82:21 84:14 138:10 138:12154:2 individually (I) 86:21 Individuals [2] 95:19 101:1 Indonesia [3)73:16 74:22 76:23 Industrial [ I I ] 12:18 12:19 13:14 14:21 32:21 46:3 46:6 47:13 47:14 47:23 71:4 industries [10] 2:17 2:24 27:20 27:25 102:13 114:17 127:24 128:3 205:6 205:11 Industry [13] 30:9 69:8 69:23 70:1 70:10 70: 15 70:16 70:18 73:7 93:5 130:10 178: 15 213:1 Ineffective [1] 147:14 Inertia 1) 47:6

Inevitably [1] 170:12 Infer [1] 228:10 Inferring [1] 225:20 Inflltration [1) 69:20 Infinite [2)172:16 181:1 Influence [2)01:9 83:21 Influencing [1)200:12 Inform

13)8:25192:12192:21 information (42) 10:19 14:2 14:11 14:12 16:16 16; 17 28:11 29:6 32:9 37:13 58:2178:4 111:14 147:13 154:12 154:13 170:1 176:17 176:24 189:22 190:8 192:25 193:4 193:8 193:9 195:19 200:11

[21153:4153:12 inh< ofe (1)13:2 Initial [9] 26:17 34:13 93:4 118:25 131:21 132:4132:10 132:15134:7 Initiative ;61 21:8 90:4 94:19 194:3 201:6 204: fj Initiatives (6) 30:7 91:6 95:14 99:7 201:15 201: 16 ln)ect [1)104:24 Injected 11)162:14 Input [1)209:21 Input/output (1) 75:17 inputs [1)144:11 Insignificant 1)43:22

Insistence [1)110:24 Insisting [1) 146:11 Inspiration [1]f:13 Inspire (4) 149:20 149:22 150:7 157:10 Inspired [1] 198:21 Inspiring [1] 158:25 Install [2)61:5 213:13 installation [2)208:7 213:9 Installed [5] 95:7 119:20 119:24 120:5 120:7 Installing [2] 212:1 215:11 Instance [8] 117:9 117:19 118:12 118:25 120: 10121:25 124:17 184:14 Instead [8] 96:20 101:17 109:3 119:13 136:7 151:19 166:16196:20 Institute

2:4 7:23 8:20 69:13 131:3 179:17 18:9

institutional [3)14:4179:10180:11 Institutions [3)21:9 21:19 25:16 INSTRUCTIONS [1] 235:20 Instrument [2)103:12103:16 Instruments

[7] 18:24 22:15 25:16 42:14 62:1 92: 1 92:14 Insurance 111 102:21 integrate [2)154:23 226:11 Integrated [23] 1:8 3:0 3:13 4:14 6:13 6:17 8:9 25:11 28:3 38:13 72:11189.5192:11 162:21 193:3 193:5 193:11 230:14

a

239:17 232:7 235:3 235:9 235:14 Intense [2)17:23 141:15 Intensify [6] 10:7 19:13 20:6 20:8 117:18 117: 20 Intensive [4] 51:20 70:16 165:22 178:21 Intent (1) 110:22 Intention [1] 224:8 Intentional [1) 84:3 Intentions [2)98:23 152:20 Interaction [2)109:18 189:4 interactions r i ] 206:23 Interconnect [1] 139:11 Interconnecting [2] 144:9 146:6 Interconnection [3)215:1215:12 215:18 Interest \5\ 81:1 134:11 106:8 199:10 201:1 Interested [5] 6:24 20:16 77:23 108:9 160:6 interesting [61 87:12 97:24 140:7 141:15 141:21 Interestingly [3)15:11 15:1216:9 Interests [1] 72:8 Interglacial [1)40:17 rntorgovemmcntal ri) 14:3 Interim [1) 230:21 Interior [1] 143:11 interisland r i ] 33:11 intermittent [3)225:17 225:24 226:1 Intemational 9) 12:5 33:14 33:16 33:10 33:19 56: i l 62:6 72:10162:1 Internationally [2)206:3 216:10 Internet [1] 183:10 Interpret [1] 109:4 Intersection [1)121:6 Intertied ra] 122:20 122:20 123:1 Introduce [1)5:12 Introduced (1) 198:5 Introduction [1] 198:4 Intrusive [11146:2 intuitive [1) 175:7 Invaslves 11) 72:2 Invent [1] 106:1 Inventory (20) 2:6 26:15 26:17 26:20 28:7 28: 10 26:13 28:19 29:17 30:22 37:14 37: 23 89:1 62:4 93:1 200:18 201:5 201: 10 201:25 203:6 Inversed (1) 173:2 invest 3)136:2174:25 175:6

Invested (2) 76:25 176:20

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/( Investigation [1] 230:24 Investigative [1] 196:10 Investing [1] 216.20 mvestment J4] 206:24 214:10 214:14 216:23 Investor ra 210:14 227.24 Investor-owned [1)217:11 Invitation [1)28:18 Invited [2)29:1 199:1 Inviting [3] 28:5 37:19 205:3 Invoke [1] 155:16 Invoked [1)150:10 Involved [14] 3:24 8:3 8:6 114:12 114:24 146: 23151:12 169:6 163:9 165:17 187:2 199:25 213:21 221:18 involvement [1)7:25 Involves [3)71:16 82:16100:19 Involving [2)25:15166:23 IPCC (13) 9:15 10:13 14:2 16:17 18:4 38: 18 45:3 45:5 60:23 56:10 57:24 58: 16 170:14 IPPe [2)33:7111:2 IRC p ] 68.7 104:5 IRP [49] 2:21 3:14 54:3 76:16 127:18 188: 16 100:2 190:3 100:4 190:18 100:23 191:3 191:7 101:13 191:23 193.15 194:6 194:14 194:16 195:3 165:11 195:17 195:18 195:18 195:22 195:23 196:25 196:1 196:7 198:9 198:25 199:7 200:2 200:5 200:6 200:0 200: 15 200:15 203:14 204:0 204:21 204: 24 219:18 223:15 223:24 224:3 224: 8 224:20 230:2 IRPs [3] 200:13 202:22 202:24 Irresponsible 1)52:1 rrlgation [21 60:17 60:20 Island (24) 46:16 48:2 48:6 48:8 59:21 59: 21 60:6 62:12 75:16 60:6 82:17 107: 2 109:18132:9140:11 145:10145: 15 151:23 162:1 152:18 162:23 178: 5186:24187:19 Islands [4) 46:10 82:17 107:7 122:21 Isle [1] 105:20 ism (1) 60:20 Isolate [1] 62:19 isolated [1] 143:1 Issue [46) 2.3 3.21 3:23 5:22 5:24 8:19 24: 16 25:12 60:12 60:22 81:23 64:17 66: 19 66:22 68:21 63:18 67:2 88:12 89: 22 90:8 91:0 02:5 02:6 93:2 93:3 94: 13 106:14106:5106:15148:2148: 21 153:6 154:10 154:15 154:17 155: 4 156:14 176:2 101:7 181:13 185:3 185:5 192:13 193:20 193:23 194:4 Issued [1] 53:22 Issues [32) 2:3 4:10 4:19 8:12 8:16 9:25 15: 19 19:23 21:1 37:3 60:13 64:21 86:3 87:13 69:7 69:18 90:6 96:17 103:23 103:25 105:4 105:14 109:10 109:20

113:1167:2167:3172:20173:19 178:10181:18107:5 It'll r i ) 139:24 Italian [11137:19 Items [2] 139:4 217:20 iteration (1) 224:23 Itself [9] 48:7 53:21 170:21 182:15193:15 201:21222:5 229:1 229:3

Jade [1] 213:2 James [1] 153:11 Janeiro (1) 14:7 January [4)21:20 32:16 68:24 156:7 Japanese (1) 76:4 Jars [1] 152:14 Jeez [1] 35:7 Jeff [13] 2:19 114:23 146:13 146:16 148: 19 158:25 166:12 170:4 172:11 174: 12181:3103:6104:13 Jef fs (3)146:13148:16 179:8 Jet [8] 63:4 63:15 82:3 82:4 82:5 106:7 106:8 106:11 Jim (14) 2:13 15:4 61:10 67:1 68:2 90:15 90:19 90:22 99:15 100:16 101:10 102:19 111:17 112:3 Jim's [2)16.5 90.17 Job (8) 11:25 27:3 69:17 99:13 101:1 161: 21151:21 213:5 Jobs p) 102:6 102:12 112:25 John p7) 2:5 2:23 8:4 8:8 10:23 26:11 26: 13 26:18 26:21 27:10 37:20 37:24 38: 15 53:16 62:10 63:1 79:12 79:15 168: 5198:8 205:5 219:21 219:24 221:6 221:6 221:9 229:7 John's [1] 26:14 Join [1)231:24 Joined [3] 36:25 67:21 78:9 Joining [7] 5:15 5.17 79:25 111:9 114:21 198; 13198:15 Joint (1) 140:11 JolnUy [1] 29:t Joints [1] 140:15 Jose (1) 210:6 Judicial [1] 199:8 Juice [2] 140:11 140:15 Jump [1) 140:3 Jumped P) 144:8 212:15 Jumping (1) 142:25 Jumps [1] 139:18 June [8] 1:15 37:16 53:18 234:7 235:2 235: 4 235:10 235:12 Jurisdiction

M) 196:13 Juxtapose [1] 10:14

K

(J

Kahala [1] 185:14 Kahe [2)77:1107:7 Kahuku [1] 107:3 Kaiulani (3) 5:13 7:7 67:7 Kanul j l ) 165:16 Katrina [2] 18:9 150:7 Katrinas j l ) 18:11 Kaual [8] 48:26 75:16 77:3 120:11 120:17 121:7122:21 165:3 Kaya (2)27:23 79:13 Kay a's [1)201:20 Kealoha [14] 2:17114:16127:22128:3 128:6 131:8 131:10 131:12 131:14 168:12 168:17169:14 173:22181:7 Keeling ^2112:7 12.7 <eep .14] 9:5 11:7 34:24 57:15 90:6 101: 12 101:12 101:17 134:21139:22 139 22142:4161:23188:25 1 Key I [6118:25 37:3 65:15 82:12 131:5 176

Kick J1) 212:13 KIck-sUrt [1] 212:13 Kickoff [1] 25:22 k idd ing

(41 72:23 145:3 164:22 187:7

(3)71:23147.20147.20 Kills j l ) 213:17 Kilowatt [10] 120:11120:12 120:18 125:23 128:12 131:22 196:22 196:24 209:9 210:18 210:23 210:25 211:1 211:4 211:7 211:7 211:24 226:4 228:16 Klmberiy's j l ) 08:16 k imura [10] 2:24 205:6 205:8 205:11 205:13 205:23 225:11 228:6 227:8 228:9 Kind I [48] 3:22 4:2 10:14 12:26 21:10 25:2 25:7 66:13 62:3 72:16 76:22 86:18 91:16 94:3 94:13 05:25 96:21 98:3 112:2 122:5 122:16 139:12 143:4 143:17 147:6 155:15 157:0 157:11 158:4 164:21 165:8 165:23 180:10 183:1 184:13 186:2 186:7 196:11 207:5 209:2 210:2 216:101216:25 217:6 217:15 216:16 226:14 226:18 Kinds I P1] 2:24 70:8 73:8 09:18 102:7 103: 25 104:17 105:13 107:23 109:9 109: 20 111:5 205:10 206:4 210:6 212:22 213:22 216:20 217:3 222:1 226:17 Kiosk [11177:1 k iosks t l ) 209:20 knock ing j l ] 143:11 knowledge (7) 146:1 148:17 149:9 150:17 151: 13158:7 159:16 j Known

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/8/ [817:1»/:2J 27:13 27:25 46:13 59: 17 200:14 214:25 Koki [1] 72:1 Kokubun [3)6:10 78:9 88:20 kona [1)52:12 konan j l ] 86:5 kualapuu [1] 86:5 Kyoto [8] 21:5 23:4 23:18 30:10 31:25 92: 1193:24 229:2

Latest [3)0:16 41:2 66:7 Latitudes p i 13:18 18:22 51:2 Laudable [1] 112:22 Laugh [1)221:14 Launch [1] 25:1 Launched r i ] 69:8 Ls w [22] 22:24 27:20 36:18 77:7 77:10 79: 7 84:1 84:9 84:15 84:22 94:20 101: 12 200:16 203:6 203:23 204:7 223:7 223:10 223:12 230:7 230:10 230:11 LAWS [6] 156:10 199:14 202:3 203:25 204: 3 204.16 Lay [1] 122:1 Layer [1] 55:19 Layout [1] 123:6 Lazy [2)151:20 151:22 Lead [6] 26:16 40:19 86:9 86:10 115:5 140: 4 Leader [5] 7:11 10:20 25:20 28:1 201:21 Leaders [6] 86:1 183:7 103:16 164:21 184:22 185:2 Leadership [5] 91:17 92:12 201:20 201:22 213:8 Leading [2)12:4 62:8 Leads [2] 27:24 40:4 Leakage [1] 22:5 Leap [1] 22:13 Leapfrog [1] 173:11 Learn [3)3:18 3:20 118:16 Learn-by-do ing [1] 118:16 Lea med [1)187:15 Learning [9] 115:22 118:1 118:15 118:16 118: 19 118:23110:0 120:3 120:8 Least [17] 0:6 14:13 16:21 56:10 64:23 76: 10 05:12 119:23 123:13 124:19 149: 10 164:8 170:24 161:25 194:23 203: 6 232:11 Leave [2)187:18197:2 Leaves [2)39:20 145:10 Leaving [2)39:22 88:15 LEED (3)135:1 135:2 135:2 Left [5] 30:22 30:22 60:17 104:5 113:17 Left-hand [2] 30:22 119:14 Leftover [1] 99:23 Legislation [8] 79:1 94:15 94:17 99:14 105:7 109: 13109:23 204:2 Legislative [14j 2:11 68:1 87:3 87:6 87:16 87:23 68:3 89:7 90:4 91:6 94:19 105:15 221:17222:2 Legislator [1)103:19 Legislators [2] 88:19 197:14 Legislature

[15] 37:21 63:24 68:18 99:6 109:1— 110:17 170:23 189:21 189:24191:2 193:23 199.14 202:5 202:8 204:23 Legitimate [3)101:20 102:8104:8 Lends [1] 229:3 Length [2)105:20169:5 Leo [1] 99:20 Leo's (1) 50:5 Less (10)19:15 52:2 65:16 65:17 65:18 65: 16 71:22 74:16 83:23 97:19 103:1 117:11 129:18 133:18 135:19 141:6 142:19142:21 157:20 Lessened t l ] 84:16 Letting [2] 170:16 207:1 Level [102] 16:3 16:24 17:2 16:8 18:8 18: 13 18:16 27:23 36:19 38:17 39:5 39: 10 39:12 39:21 39:23 39:25 40:1 40: 5 40:6 40:15 40:22 40:25 41:1 43:7 43:9 43:12 43:15 43:10 43:21 43:23 44:1 44:2 44:2 44:4 44:7 44:8 44:9 44:13 44:17 44:20 44:22 45:1 45:5 45:9 45:11 45:15 45:17 46:12 46:15 46:20 47:1 47:4 47:5 47:7 47:10 47: 18 48:10 48:20 52:6 52:7 52:17 52: 20 53:13 56:18 56:19 56:21 56:25 57: 6 57:13 67:15 58:6 58:9 59:10 59:23 60:22 63:6 63:12 92:21 103:5 103:6 103:0 105:10 105:11 105:15 105:16 106:4 106:9 113:2 121:15 134:5 149: 11 160:16 160:16 171:8 185:1 196:8 202:16 212:25 227:10 227:14 228:2 228:3 Leveled [1] 172:24 Leveling [1] 159:24 Levels [10] 9:13 16:13 60:9 73:2 86:25 91:6 02:17 93:8156:13169:13 Leverage [2)201:24 201:24 Lewis [1)69:15 LiDAR [1] 47:16 Lie [2)80:18 83:11 Lies rS] 78:20 79:3 79:4 85:19 86:12

[1] 228:21 Life pOl 2:10 19:19 19:21 46:9 51:18 64: 17 64:25 67:24 68:18 74:5 74:20 76: 7 76:16 77:14 77:19 79:8 81:23 06: 15 100:10 100:18 124:6 135:17 138: 10 138:19 139:10 140:4 146:5 148: 11 168:23 221:4 Llff i*cvdfi [9] 19:21 64:17 74:20 76:7 76:16 77: 14100:18115:23124:6 LIfe-sfyle m 148:11 173:10 Lifetime [1] 76:14 Lffetimes [1191:11 Lfght [23] 18:10 132:13 143:1 143:1 143:2 143:4 143:6 143:9 144:2 144:3 166: 25 169:1 180:17 184:3 184:10 184: 19 207:11 208:1 208:10 216:1 216:7 217:16 217:26 Lighting [8] 129:12 129:16 136:20 142:9 142: 12 143:10 143:11 144:4 Lights [10] 27:9 136:4 143:19 143:22 143: 25 168:13 168:13 168:15 181:6 187:9 Likely

Labeled [11 204:6 Labels [1] 135:23 Labor [4] 51:23 52:4 175:10 175:15 Laboratory [1] 182:4 Labs [1)176:13 Lack [3)37:8 151:4 229:13 U c k e d ri ] 37:10

S 66:8 184:12 la

(1) 165:23 Laid [2)118:21122:5 Lake [1) 167:20 Ldimp [4] 135:17 168:19 168:23 213:10 Lamps [7] 131:18 131:23 133:6 135:16 168: 22181:11181:16 Land [31] 2:10 12:12 17:24 43:6 45:17 45: 16 45:21 45:21 48:1 48:22 48:23 51: 23 52:4 67:25 60:16 71:5 74:5 86:16 104:13 123:17 138:22 163:23 164:3 164:20 164:25 165:2 165:11 165:20 167:6167:11167:16 Landfll l [8] 33:22 73:14 76:11 116:22 140:7 140:22162:2170:8 Landfllls [1] 178:6 Lands

E) 75:6 85:12 167:13 andscape

S 175:25 176:1 212:8 nes

[1] 151:4 Language [4)4:17 69:2 94:15 202:2 Laptop [1] 209:6 Large [12)36:1 47:2 123:17 129:4 134:4 135:10 171:21 179:3 184:5 212:11 216.8 218:8 Largely [4)72:18 00:8 118:10 170:2 Larger [7] 46:14 67:6 78:3 103:0 128:13 129; 17217:14 Largest

S 14:20 129:10 st

P1] 14:30 16:21 16:22 32:17 39:16 39:19 40:17 40:18 40:20 46:12 45:13 60:9 74:13 75:6 78:2 94:21 99:23 113:16 119:23 158:25 185:24 195:25 195:25 197:2 197:3 197:4 212:15 216:18 231:6 232:11 232:24 Lastiy [1)133:12 Late P) 14:8 119:6110:7

S?.

(6)17:718:20 58:25 63:2155:7163: 10 Limestone [1)59:18 Limit [3)68:5 74:21 227:12 Limitation [2] 37:4 98:3 Limitations [3)36:7 74:10 201:23 Limited [3)121:19 127:14169:7 Limits [3] 92:3 169:10 197:19 Line [18] 9:2 9:2 15:18 19:3 21:20 25:14 38:21 44:21 44:23 93:19 96:25 97:12 119:21 143:5 163:18 195:22 209:10 217:13 Linear [1)119:13 Lines [5] 15:22 15:23 55:13 120:9 214:18 Lineup [1] 28:23 Link [3)25:11 25:18 89:20 Linkage [1] 22:17 Unked [6] 19:1 62:2 89:16 89:17 90:2 170:25 Liquefled [1)76:18 Liquid [3)160:8161:1 161:16 Liquids [1] 160:25 List [7] 29:3 29:5 86:7 168:25 190:24 194: 10 194:12 Listed

19:18 21:22 29:25 30:22 31:17 24:3160:21

Literally [1)80:17 Literature (1) 155:1 Liu [2] 27:21 28:2 Live (6) 45:20 84:17 132:18 133:13 138: 22 164:24 Uved [1] 98:14 Lives [7] 83:24 148:6 149:10 164:21 154: 22 176:18 185:7 Loa J2) 12:6 98:15 Load [6] 73:24 97:10 123:8 129:12 225:25 226:10 Loads [1] 129:10 Loan [1] 144:25 Lobbying [1] 88:7 Lobbyists [1] 88:6 Local (16) 29:15 49:22 52:21 53:9 72:22 112:23 112:25 113:1 126:22 145:7 145:15145:15155:16 181:21 181:21 208:21 Locally [5)31:19 116:11 126:24127:2133:18 Locals [1) 49:20 Located [2] 22:5 48:7 Location [2147:15 52:20 Log p i 119:12 119:14 141:3 Logic [1] 136:13 Logistics

!J 67:16 113:16 IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/f

.5) 22:23 23:18 208:21 208:22 228:23 Marks m 64:21 Mars P) 11:11 54:15

[2)179:12180:5 Mass

K) 102:24 asses

[1] 17:24 Match

K115:22 16:1 144:16 226:22 ateriai

[3)178:4182:22 232:21 Materials [2)178:4 188:12 MaUi

K] 146:23 162:6 atson

[1)63:10 Matter [13] 53:23 65:15 84:19 04:19 84:20 85:7 89:15 91:14 91:16 96:14 130:11 149:0 234:13 Mature [11117:22 Maui [7] 49:5 60:6 60:8 60:11 75:16 60:3 80:3 Mauna [2] 12:6 165:23 Maurice [6] 27:23 28:2 79:13 79:15 201:20 204:1 Maximize

K] 73:9195:15 axlmlzed

;i) 138:16 laximlzing 1) 72:25 laxlmum

21 127:2 189:17 layor

[1] 178:16 Mean p7] 9:12 14:22 44:19 62:22 62:23 64: 20 65:9 65:10 67:4 67:5 57:5 92:5 102:8 103:2 104:8 104:19 105:3 108: 11 111:14 123:3 126:3 129:25 133: 22 137:3 173:13 175:23 185:25 187: 4 187:9 192:12 194:2 196:1 196:3 210:21 220:13 224:7 225:22 Meaning m 14:2015:2415:2517:1 121:8 124: 16226:13 Meaningful p ] 100:14 197:16 197:24 Means [15] 24:7 72:16 82:16 100:22 104:3 118:17 123:3 125:7 160:6 161:4 182: 22 201:21 201:22 211:9 217:23 Meant P) 42:18 223:9 Measure !4) 31:9 157:17 169:17 230:21 Measured [2)31:10141:17 Measurement [1)101:4 Measures [4] 131:2 134:13 136:1 157:15 Mechanics

K] 63:23 142:17 echanism

(3)23:9 23:19 103:25 Mechanisms [2)23:10 212:17 Media [2)63:15179:11 Medications (1) 185:17 Medium 1] 104:22 leet

[8] 30:3 87:19109:14 123:24 195:1 195:0 195:13 224:17 Meeter

r i j 166:2 Meeting | [10] 3:11 5:19 5:23 14:6 82:8 89:4 93 21 151:6 231:14 233:1 Meetings [1)37:7 Mega [1] 216:11 Megapixel [2)140:24 141:1 Megawatt rn 77:18 118:10 121:12 122:25 171: 16171:16 210:22 I Megawatts I [16] 80:5 80:6 80:18 122:25 123:18 123:21 123:23 126:5 126:6 126:6 126:8126:9126:11 171:17 215:25 216:9 Mellon (1) 76:12 Melt

Kl 18:17 41.20 44:2 44:6 elted 1

[1)41:22 Melting I [10] 9:12 18:25 38:23 39:1 39:2 40:1 41:12 43:20 68:18169:17 Melts

K] 69:22 69:24 ember

[7] 28:3 131:7 131:9 131:11 131:13 188:20198:16 I Members \ [S\ 6:12 99:1 153:17 232:6 232:18 Membership

K] 06:6 91:22 emory

[1] 199:24 Mention m 35:20 36:17 37:4 60:14 96:11 60: 10136:17196:14 I Mentioned [16] 18:3 18:18 34:13 76:8 91:7 91: 22 93:1 95:18 97:23111:22115:23 117:19179:11 184:20 201:10 222:3 226:18 229:10 Mentioning j l ] 100:25 Mercury J2) 181:10181:16 Mesoscale [2] 46:14 46:24 Message [3)70:170:3 70:11 Met J2) 192:1192:9 Meteorology [1] 64:4 Meter (18)40:8 40:10 40:26 43:122 45:1 45: 6 45:9 46:11 47:4 47:18 48:5 46:20 52:20 67:21 57:23 96:1 98:2 96:12 Metered

B) 176:0 176:24 etering

Kl 97:23 98:1 176:16177:22 eters

[6] 40:15 43:24 44:1 46:2 67:17 71:1 98:16167:20 Methane

Kl 12:18 12:21 30:17 31:2 ethod

K) 32:8 204:12 ethodology

a ] 30:21 ethods

[3] 30:20 82:17 229:23 Metric (1) 227:19 Metrics [1)215:11 Mic [1)169:13 Michael [1] 13:4 Michigan (11 158:16 Miconia

Logo [1] 138:1 Logos [11186:22 Long-range (4)3:15 6:14 232:9 232:18 Long-term [5)42:1 42:11 87:18 167:3 171:25 Long-winded (1) 26:6 Longstanding (1)41:5 Look [98] 6:25 7:6 13:18 13:20 13:24 16: 21 17:12 21:2 28:12 43:8 45:10 48:3 40:13 40:21 49:4 49:18 53:10 63:11 65:23 63:7 66:6 69:20 71:10 71:20 74:2 74:7 74:20 75:18 76:5 76:14 76: 21 77:14 77:16 79:22 80:22 81:17 83: 9 86:6 66:10 89:6 100:6 100:13 100: 24107:24 108:24 109:6 109:16 112: 0 112:14 115:17 117:6 117:13 117: 17 117:24 118:4 118:15 120:8 124:5 124:7 124:15 124:16 126:16 126:17 127:9 127:11 127:17 127:17 128:25 130:2 131:14 131:17 135:4 135:25 136:24 139:3 139:4 139:5 139:10 148:18 179:17 190:8 192:23 192:23 194:4 195:11 197:7 197:8 197:9 197: 11 197:13 197:15 197:16 197:23 201: 3 202:24 207:7 224:11 225:23 Looked 11] 63:14 71:25 88:10 104:20 124: 16 125:20 157:11 164:17 195:3 195: 12195:20 Looking [42] 6:8 9:22 9:23 19:20 24:20 27:3 ^0:25 52:2 63:7 54:16 57:23 64:3 76: 8 87:2 87:13 87:20 69:24 80:25 100: 2 i 103:22 103:24 108:19 116:24 130: 0 130:12130:15 132:3 133:25 136: 26 136:17 148:15 150:7 161:21 177: 19 178:9 181:8 185:6 198:1 224:14 224:23 225:1 229:15 Looks [5] 76:1679:21 95:10 111:6 167:16 Loose [D 187:1 Lose [5] 49:20 57:22 69:15 148:16 197:24 Loss ra] 41:10 42:6 42:11 Losses [3)124.17 125.6125:17 Lost ra] 41:18 141:21 186:18 Lou

C) 235:20 ove

[Sl 87:6 138:20 147:21 166:3 221:14 Low [16] 27:9 47:14 48:14 73:2 96:25 98: 10 129:20 129:24 130:5 133:3 134: 11 136:21 164:18 173:13 161:18 218: 20 Low-hanging [5] 129:20 129:24 130:5 138:21 218: 20 Low4yIng (1) 48:14 L^wer H ) 13:20 13:24 16:17 73:4 82:8 97: 18116:18162:13 180:16 226:11 229: 13 Lows

[1] 235:1 Lunch [9] 10:3 65:1 66:25 67:5 67:8 67:12 67:13 67:14 185:22 Luncheon [1] 113:23 Lunchtime [4)5:9 67:10 67:18199:20 Lying (2) 47:14 40:14

M Machine

a) 234:9 agnltude

[1] 119:0 Main [6] 10:10 30:16 40:1 40:2 60:7 Mainland [4] 33:12 104:16 109:21 128:23 Maintained

a] 85:12 aintaining

[2] 34:23 54:24 Maintains

al 106:1 aior

[16] 41:1 46:10 46:17 47:14 50:23 57: 14 68:18 n : l & 149:1 157:1 204:15 206:13 206:25 206:25 207:11 Majority [7] 12:12 36:17 106:22 128:11 151: 25 204:4 219:14 Makers [1] 89:21 Man [4] 67:9 69:16 98:23 196:4 Man-made [2)12:1912:22 Manageable [2)139:6139:16 Managed (2)170:15 232:4 Management [11)16:16 60:11 60:12 60:2178:18 89:10 89:10 69:25 96:21 136:21 190: 10 Mandate

S 166:17 192:6 102:6 192:6 165:6 3:16 223:19

Mandates [8] 98:22 99:B 109:26 191:23 192:1 196:8 203:2 203:3 Mandating j l ] 95:17 Mandatory (4)61:16108:6 196:7 230:13 Mann [1] 13:6 Manner [3] 123:5127:11 180:2 Manoa

B] 86:6 137:13 176:7 anufacturers

[1)181:16 Manufacturing

(81 42:15 42:16 46:12 46:13 47:17 47: 20 67:20 67:21 Mapped

Mapunapuna [1] 46:2 March

K] 46:13 216:19 arched

[1] 148:3 Marginal (0) 93:12 05:10 96:20 95:21 96:1 97: 17 97:18106:17 Mariano [4) 1:24 234:5 234:18 235:12 Marine [7] 33:10 33:19 64:4 104:21 104:22 149:19 179:2 Marit [1)135:12 Market [14] 92:1 92:10 92:14 92:23 92:23 119:3 119:4 132:23 144:24 161:10 208:22 227:15 228:25 229:5 Market-based

E]92:1 92:10 arketplace

[1) 212:13 Markets

(J

[1)71:24 Microphone p i 8:15 169:12 174:4 Microwave (2173:11118:25 Mid [8113:16 18:22 45:7 69:9122:6122: 15122:19127:13 Middle [6] 19:4 45:8 56:12 96:19 139:15 164: 4 Might (38Tll:21 13:3 14:6 14:8 17:6 35:10 42:6 42:9 49:1 67:25 60:14 93:17 96: 1 98:13 90:6 105:18 100:16 109:20 120:12 120:15 120:17 124:21 124:23 145:5 155:21 155:22 168:8 158:19 169:18 169:19 182:25 186:3 199:15 200:22 225:18 230:12 231:1 231:8 Mike (10) 2:2 3:2 3:6 8:22 25:21 26:24 27: 10 38:12146:21 188:6 Mikulina (14) 2:19 114:23 146:13 146:19 146: 21 170:4 170:7 172:17 174:14 177: 13 178:9 179:13 184:20 187:3 Mile [1] 65:24 Mileage [3] 82:20 82:24 142:6 Miles [7] 19:8 39:1 39:7 03:4 141:7 141:9 142:1 Mililani [2] 97:6 235:2 Military [ l | 31:22 Milllmetera '6] 39:11 39:13 39:14 39:18 39:20 39:

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/ W Missions [1] 199:5

(2) 18:10 18:10 Mistake [1)54:19 Mitigate p) 82:5 82:6 84:12 Mitigation [4] 30:20 81:17 82:7 89:9 M I X

B] 172:1 172:4 190:7 oana

BI 46:21 48:4 ock

a] 166:23 ock-up

(1) 165:23 Moda [2)21:11 159:6 Model [12] 6:7 15:16 15:18 15:24 20:10 24: 1 34:24 43:7 46:24 103:21 176:11 177:25 Modeling [3)0:2 15:23 44:23 fi^odelled Tl] 42:24 Models (12) 13:19 15:16 16:2 37:5 37:7 37: 10 42:25 53:6 75:17 100:19 222:5 222:6 Moderator [112] 2:2 3:2 3:4 7:7 25:25 37:20 50: 1 50:16 61:12 62:6 53:15 64:2 54:7 55:2 55:11 66:16 58:3 58:5 68:12 58: 14 59:7 60:23 62:6 63:1 63:19 64:11 65:2 65:19 66:9 66:16 67:7 67:19 78: 6 78:8 66:23 90:13 99:15 100:6 100: 15 101:10 102:18 103:17 104:1 105: 6 105:17 106:18 108:25 110:1 110:7 110:13 111:16 112:3 112:16 113:14 113:25 127:20 137:11 137:22 143:14 146:11 158:25 166:1 168:6 160:2 170:3 171:5 171:24 172:10 173:20 173:24 174:7 175:8 175:14 175:18 176:4 178:2 179:7 181:3 161:19 183: 4 187:14 186:1 186:2 198:2 205:5 205:21 219:7 219:12 219:21 220:1 220:3 220:8 221:2 221:6 221:9 221: 12 223:3 223:5 223:13 223:15 223: 23 224:3 226:2 225:6 225:15 225:20 227:3 228:5 229:7 230:1 231:5 231: 10 Moderator's j l ] 196:25 Modern [1] 40:19 Modest [1] 17:13 Modification [1] 177:9 Modified 3)31:14 181:22 161:24 odify

1) 136:8 olsture

1] 150:5 oloka' i

B]49:1 66:1 88:3 90:10 oment

[7] 24:1 27:18 63:9 78:1 138:7 138: 17139:12 Money [46] 10:7 61:4 68:18 68:20 68:22 68: 23 68:24 72:7 84:25 85:3 85:4 85:7 85:16 101:12 101:13 101:14 101:17 102:4 102:14 121:20 121:22 121:23 121:25 127:13 132:7 138:20 139:24 144:17 145:14 146:8 151:17 157:2 158:18 162:21 174:24 177:6 170:23 185:20 196:20 207:23 208:3 208:4 208:9 208:23 215:21 218:10 Mongo (1)221:3 Mongoose [1)71:23 Monies [1)61:20

Monitor (2) 54:8 92:3 Monitored [1)162:15 Monitoring [5] 42:3 54:18 54:20 54:25 57:9 Monotonlcal [1)12:9 Month [5] 32:17 48:7 97:4 207:23 210:19 Monthly [3)98:10 207:14 207:14 Months [6] 38:18 39:19 44:16 85:24 156:4 232:19 Montreal [1] 55:16 Moon (2)11:4 213:2 Moral [5] 87:24 88:13 90:7 91:15 170:21 Morass [1] 197:18 Morita [16)2:12 6:11 7:10 7:11 27:7 68:1 86 25 87:7 87:10 91:7 91:22 103:10 105: 7105:12109:6 219:15 Morning [25] 3:4 5:15 5:16 26:26 28:5 51:8 78; 9 78:17 79:12 87:10 113:22 114:8 115:2 138:8 168:7 171:1 186:8 198:5 198:13 198:15 198:17 200:17 200:21 203:1 222:3 Morning's [1] 199:21 Most [56] 7:16 11:4 11:20 14:2 16:8 16:20 21:14 24:7 36:18 39:6 40:7 42:22 43: 25 48:16 49:11 56:2 66:20 83:3 83: 11 92:18 101:16 107:6 108:3 108:12 109:3 121:22 121:23 122:2 126:3 130:23 132:2 135:7 137:1 141:6 141: 23 142:11 152:19 153:24 166:10 160: 2 160:4 161:7 173:19 177:7 178:12 178:15 194:1 194:18 194:19 204:3 207:8 211:12 211:13 214:1 216:25 Mostiy

SI 33:22 88:6 Other

[1] 74:7 Motion [1] 09:4 Motivate

g] 147:1 150:13 otivating

[61 2:18 115:1 146:15 146:18 148:2

Motivation [1] 229:13 Motors [1] 136:22 Mountain [1)179:17 Mountains [1)52:15 Mouth

K] 197:21 215:21 ove

[18] 4:16 4:23 8:19 7:8 75:1 66:24 89: 14 92:2 132:16 134:9 141:4 160:23 154:3 177:18 179:18 179:20 184:12 227:6 Moved [2] 92:9 184:4 Movement [2)91:20 146:10 Movie [3)5:9114:11 114:13 Moving [9] 6:3 41:9 88:17 90:5 90:6 143:23 148:10158.23181:15 Multi :2) 14:4 34:14 lulti-institutlonal

1)14:4 ulti-year

1)34:14 ultlmlllions

} Million [15] 19:12 56:12 125:22 126:19 126: 20 126:22 140:22 160:23 161:17 161: 18 163:3 182:7 210:24 222:13 222:14 Millions [2)60:15 60:19 Mina (13) 9:20 88:25 87:4 90:13 102:19 103:17 104:1 105:7 105:17 108:10 109:1 110:1 210:15 Mind [5] 51:25 67:15 68:10 155:6 168:23 Minds [2] 86:3 146:2 Mine Pl 76:10 197:20 Mined '11161:9 Mines [11162:25 Minimize [1) 112:22 Minimizes [1] 73:6 Minimizing [11194:11 Mining [21175:22 175:23 Minor

Wnus [3139:19 39:21 212:3 Minute '9) 39:9 50:8 66:11 99:17 99:18 187: 17197:1 219:9 223:11 Minutes 8] 5:2 5:17 28:8 64:12 64:12 68:6 98: 7 114:9

Mired (1)197:24 Misconceptions ^213:16 lissed

26:24 224:2 ssing

11 44:11 . Jsslon [3] 54:23 199:12 223:16

[1] 218:10 Multinational [1] 14:4 Municipal r4]116:il 122:9123:10 128:12 Music

a) 147:6 ust

(12) 24:22 79:8 79:6 80:19 80:20 80: 22 82:10 83:11 94:23 179:7 193:11 230:14 Muzzle 1) 15:8

Space [1)183:19 Myth [1)168:17

ft^

N •HTS [1] 235:23 N20 [1] 30:18 Name [2)3:6 198:24 Name's [1)27:10 Names j l ) 88:9 Nanakuli j l ] 108:21 Narrow [2] 120:21 160:25 NASA

B 15:4 16:6 54:14 54:24 61:7 61:10 :23 112:4

NASA's

K ] 64:10 ation

[2)81:18128:19 National [B] 21:1 68:7 88:7 128:14 129:8 129: 17150:2 162:4 National/International [1] 69:23 Nations [5] 25:3 25:3 25:5 61:17 158:21 Nationwide

12) 30:2 34:3 iative

K.) 7:1 85:11 181:21 181:23 atural

(18) 2:4 7:22 8:12 8:20 15:23 15:25 49:23 76:18 91:5 100:17 101:2 106:8 128:23 142:11 142:11 161:1 180:17 168:9 Naturally [2)128:6 136:1 Nature

G) 100:23 170:17 171:3 216:22 ay

[1] 13:23 Near [10] 45:15 57:3 59:15 109:9 121:23 122:6 127:12 153:6 170:6 192:11 Near-term

11)121:23 Jea rest

[1] 127:15 Nearly (5) 107:17 146:3 150:6 203:7 204:1 Nec

K ] 226:14 ecessariiy

(9) 62:22 80:19 203:2 207:2 213:4 214:19 215:5 215:6 226:21 Need (86) 4:19 19:4 19:4 19:10 19:13 19: 19 20:3 20:20 21:25 22:6 22:10 22: 15 22:16 22:25 23:1 23:2 23:6 25:17 59:13 61:16 63:7 71:18 76:1 79:13 70:19 80:14 81:16 82:9 83:9 84:1 84: 9 04:13 05:4 86:14 94:12 96:13 96: 15 100:24 103:15 108:2 108:2 108:6 108:13 116:12 118:15 121:8 122:1 122:3 124:22 124:23 126:20 127:9 127:10 127:11 132:13 133:16 134:22 135:4 136:2 136:22 163:3 157:4 160:

7 W0:8 185-17 171:3171:16 172:1 176:17 187:11 192:1 197:7 197:8 197:12 213:6 213:7 213:16 213:16 213.21 213:23 214:10 216:13 216:23 217:2 225:23 226:1 Needed [6)34:8 36:13115:18135:21 144:21 168:14 Needing [1] 144:6 Needs [23] 17:22 19:1 22:10 35:22 38:15 61: 8 63:14 81:6 83:16 108:14 130:25 168:8 164:9 166:17 167:12 184:9 102:20 198:4 212:24 217:3 222:8 222:12 230:18 Negative

Cl 42:20 81:22 154:15 173:1 egotiations

[1] 167:0 Neighbor [2] 122:21 145:1 Neighborhood J4] 107:23 144:19 160:1 160:23 Neighbors (2)144:11 145:5 Neons J1) 82:21 Nervous

1)128:5182:24 et

18] 15:14 39:2 39:7 41:11 41:12 41: 13 41:15 41:21 42:20 66:6 64:20 94: 23 07:23 08:1 126:18 165:15 165:18 212:3 Neutral [5] 76:13 102:22 166:12 166:22 196: 19 Never (8) 3:25 4:1 39:14 70:8 83:4 135:8 166:14 222:6 New [32] 21:12 22:3 22:24 25:14 36:13 38: 20 38:2139:3 41:12 51:19 61:5 61: 21 65:12 70:3 74:6 84:21 89:16 89: 19 89:24 102:12 112:5 134:25 135:4 135:10 141:25 146:6 150:9 150:12 167:7 158:19 166:20 185:1 News rn 16:6 21:23 21:24 22:9 22:11 99:9 09:10 Newspapers [1) 162:15 Next [32] 4:20 21:5 20:4 43:16 46:22 63: 16 69:4 64:6 66:17 67:22 78:10 79: 22 127:22 129:11 130:14 144:14 146: 13 149:1171:23 184:23 184:25 186: 10 166:10 195:17 202:7 202:16 215: 17 216:6 229:7 232:15 232:16 232:19 Nice [2)41:10161:12 Nickel

166:2168:20 ght 117:14163.21

MBY 1] 80:20

MBY-ism 11 60:20

na 7:10 108:23

ne (2)21:8 21:18 Nineties [6] 14:5 29:7 53:22 69:5 69:9 119:7 [31 62:25 S3:2 53:3 Ninos [11 53:1 Nishihara j l i 67:20 Nitrogen [3)23:0 23:1123:13 Nitrous (4)12:18 30:17 31:2166:4 No-bralner J2] 132:16 136:20 No-brainers

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/ m [IJ 136:4 No-fault [2)102:21 102:25 No>regret [2] 36:2 79:16 No-regrets j l ) 61:15 Nobody [2)148:5159:13 Non [12)19:5 29:11 31:17 33:1 33:1 33: 21 68:21 75:7 103:15 140:4 196:23 214:5 Non-carbon-em itting «) 196:23

on-disposable [1] 140:4 Non-energy J3] 29:11 31:17 33:21 Non-fossil [1)19.5 Non-highway [1] 33:1 Non-peak [1] 103:15 Non-point [1] 75:7 Non-profits [1] 68:21

Non-Utility p]33:1 214:5 None [2)60:24143:24 Nonetheless

K ] 166:8 onrenewable

[1] 124:2 Normal [2] 176:1 182:1 Normalize [1)31:6 Normalized

C) 44:19 ormally

S) 196:2 orman

1] 62.8 ormative

[1)155:11 North J3] 47:4 107:2 123:19 Northeast [1)21:8 Northem [1)12:12 Not-so-green [2)218:1 218:12 Notary (1) 234:5 Note [8)34:11 37:14 68:8 176:4 105:10 202:10 Noted

Bl 31:15 32:19 37:5 84:4 otes

[ I ] 32:4 Notii ing [ I I ] 57:2 75:14 75:14 78:3 109:7 112: 19 134:5 137:2 137:6 149:21 168:7 Notice

S 47:24 48:9 49:7 61:11 71:21 91: 169:25

Noticeable [1)91:12 Notif led: Date [1] 235:25 Notify ri) 235:23 i^oUon [2)102:4113:9 Novel [1] 35:7 Nuclear p j 160:6 176:2

G] 214:13 ul

E:

G

n 1) 185:14 umber

(26110:21 11:8 21:3 21:21 77:1 77: 16 82:8 82:16 101:21106:5 105:19 111:3 117:4 119:4 123:8 123:16 133: 24 135:22 147:12 148:24 157:18 164: 16 171:21 184:23 189:9 196:15 Numbering M] 64:1 Numbers [8] 35:9 57:16 57:19 59:2 82:12 110: 25128:14 129:8 Numerous [1] 201:8 Nurseries [1] 85:11

Oahu [28] 59:19 75:18 60:10 80:10 106:20 108:22 107:21 108:20 110:23 115:20 115:20 116:18 116:20 121:13 122:23 123:1 123:2 123:7 123:11 123:13 123:15 123:17 123:24 124:22 126:7 126:12165:2 171:14 Oahu's (11116:21 Obey [11196:5 Objective [11 89:4 object ives [10] 87:19 190:5 194:5 194:7 194:14 194:16 194:20 200:14 200:18 201:10 202:10 202:13 202:23 203:15 205:1 224:12 234:13 224:18 Obligation [2188:13 88:13 observat ions [419:10 16:2 43:11 227:5 observatory [ l j 12:6 observed (1144:7 Observing (11 63:24 Obtained [2131:16192:19 obvious [2)160:4 199:23 obviously [12] 24:21 75:20 61:23 104:14 127:1 136:3 141:5 173:8 178:19 187:4 210: 24 218:19

Occur (8) 13:21 51:7 153:5 163:6 153:13 176:19 207:20 228:23 Occurred [2)14:2516:1 Occurring [6] 14:14 42:25 74:24 74:24 149:17 169:16 Occurs (2)48:11 155:22 Ocean (43)9:11 18:11 16:12 38:4 44:6 46:4 46:4 47:2 49:9 66:2 56:4 56:6 59:8 69:20 69:24 60:16 60:21 83:4 63:5 63:20 63:22 63:24 66:23 77:8 77:9 60:12 100:8 100:9 100:10 100:12 104:13 107:5 107:19 109:4 116:22 116:23 117:16122:24145:22149:17 159:4 162:24171:4 Oceanic [1] 150:2 Oceanography (1) 64:3 Oceans [3)40:3 43:160:13 Off-peak [2196:6 96:10 Off-Uie-shelf

w:r §170:11226:8 231:7

rfered

[1] 163:3 Offering [1)166:16 Office rei 34:22 66:5 169:25 105:9 199:20 Offlcer [1] 27:24 Offs (21223:24 224:4 Offset (17) 94:9 94:9 174:24 207:15 207:22 209:12 209:14 209:19 209:18 209:22 209:25 210:4 210:19 214:11 216:4 227:14 227:17 Offsets [2)21:21 227:17 Offshore [2184:25 176:12 Often (6) 74:15 75:12 88:2 99:10 136:6 154

Ohio (1) 22:5 OII [39] 10:6 13:3 20:22 21:16 35:25 73: 18 73:19 80:4 80:23 108:6 120:17 124:15 124:16 124:19 124:20 124:25 126:1 126:1 129:23142:5159:17 159:16 159:20 160.3 160:7 160:17 160:19 160:21 161:3 161:9 161:10 164:25 165:1 165:3 165:12 165:25 165:25167:21226:3 Oklahoma [1113:4 Old [7] 10:22 38:25 74:3 88:4 88:9 90:10 185:19 Older [1] 187:6 Olelo [1] 4:21 On-site [1)130:15 On: [1]2'3S?33 T Once I [14] 22:9 34:10 56:14 110:20 132:25 134:18 139:5 150:17 152:4 158:22 166:8 177:8 227:13 231:12 One I (200) 4:11 4:12 4:13 7:23 10:2 13:3 15:4 15:8 15:17 19:26 21:23 22:23 24:10 27:15 28:22 29:21 31:4 31:18 37:2 37:6 40:9 40:18 43:24 45:2 45:3 45:15 46:23 49:4 60:8 50:17 50:17 61:0 52:20 55:23 56:4 59:10 61:17 61:24 65:21 66:8 66:19 69:4 71:1 72: 24 73:1 73:5 74:21 75:6 75:12 76:2 77:1 77:24 82:2 82:12 82:16 83:20 84:2 64:20 85:6 65:9 85:20 86:21 88: 23 91:6 91:16 91:15 91:16 91:16 91: 23 92:6 93:1 93:4 93:18 93:22 93:23 94:6 95:18 97:3 97:24 90:3 100:5 101:4 101:24 103:3 103:16 103:17 104:19 105:21 106:4 106:20 107.15 108:10 109:1 112:8 112:17 113:13 114:1 114:18116:17121:1 121:1 121:2 123:6 123:8 125:7 125:9 127:8 127:18 129:10 131:18 132:1 133:24 134:25 139:13 140:11 140:15 140:20 141:2 141:15 141:21 142:19 144:10 144:13 145:25 146:7 147:12 148:7 148:7 149:24 150:19 151:4 162:12 152:12 152:24153:25155:3 157:5 157:8 157:6 158:12 156:25 160:10 161:9 163:12 164:16 166:2 169:17 171:12 172:3 172:11 175:1 175:1 177:11 179:18180:10182:23 184:15 185:14 185:21 186:14 186:18 108:22 106:24 107:3190:24192:11 194:13 194:22 195:17 196:14 196:16 196:25 201:14 202:14 202:16 203:1 204:15 206:25 207:11 211:13 211:14 211:18 212:22 212:24 213:7 214:1 214:16 216:9 218:1 218:6 218:111218:12 218:24 233:23 224:13 226:12 228:6 228:22 230:4 236:19 I One's I

P) 4:10 82:14 111:17 112:4 173:24

181:20 201:22 229:-/ One-hundred-year [1)31:4 One-minute [1] 50:8 One-Slded [1] 235:19 One-third [2)112:11 167:13 Ontf-time-use (1) 140:20 Onsrous (1) 214:4 Ones [6) 20:1 46:17 49:21 52:2 99:22 182:

Ontario [1)312:15 0 0 0 [1] 233:4 Open [3f 47:2 142:14 196:10 Opening [3] 2:1 3:1 20:6 Operate [ l ] 136:15 Operating [1)74:19 Operational [21223:24 224:4 Operations [2)166:17 225:23 Opinion [9] 22:19 24:24 54:14 61:19 69:5 69: 6153:21166:10176:16 OpiTOrtunities [3)70:17 80:15177:17 Opportunify [8] 20:24 28:4 37:17 79:4 145:16 146: 22 205:2 213:8 Opposed [4)74:19 90:19 95:16152:11 Opposing (1)142:13 Opposite [ l l l43:10 Optics (2ri43:16 143:16 Optimization [ i f 192:22 Optimized

gj^l04:22 195:7 pt ion

[5)21:2 93:13 97:8 98:1 196:16 Options [13] 2:164:12 10:16 114:2 115:8 168: 3 190:9 190:10 196:12 203:11 224: 15 224:17 226:16 Oranges [1] 16:7 Orbiting [1] 39:16 Ordtfr [9] 17:1 19:6 19:14 43:21 64:4 124:4 160:24168:11 201:23 Ordsrs [2)119:8194:18 Organic [4] 144:21 144:21 144:23 144:25 Organism [2)182:20182:23 Organization [3)66:3 69:14 90:18 Organized [1)3:12 Organizing [1)l0:25 Orig [1] 235:21 Original [2] 235:1 235:24 Orieans [1)150:12 Ornamental [1)71:24 Oscar [1] 199:23

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/8 # Oscillation (1) 42:8 Oshiro [1] 35:2 Ostensibly [1] 178:5 OTEC [9] 107:6 116:23 122:24 122:25 123: 8171:9171:13171:14 171:16 Otherwise [1)111:25 Ourselves [6] 41:8 72:2 108:2 108:7 108:13 187: 6 Outcomes [1] 200:21 Outgoing [1] 88:5 OuUaw [3)166:25181:11 181:17 Outiay [2)132:11 132:15 Outiine [1] 29:18 Outiined [2)136:19 222:22 Outiines [1] 203:23 Output [1] 125:24 Outputs [1)144:12 Outreach [4] 29:15 206:23 208:6 213:11 Outside [315:10196:13 211:17 Outward [1] 155:14 Outwards [11142:16 Ovens [1] 118:25 Overage [ I ] 168:15 Overall [ I I ] 7:4 15:14 23:11 33:25 35:14 44: 7 51:5 64:18 65:7 82:8 217:5 Overcome [1] 80:20 Overhead (1) 113:20 Overiooked [1] 103:23 Overseas (2) 31:22 79:5 Oversees (1] 231:2 Overview (4)2:3 8:16 8:19 26:14 Overwhelmed (1) 138:23 Overwhelming [1] 89:13 Owe [1] 32:22 Own [IB] 6:7 9:24 67:8 67:13 73:6 83:6 98: 24 99:5111:1 139:10181:25 203:11 203:12 227:10 229:3 230:20 230:22 230:23 Owned (8) 33:6 69:14 179:11 210:14 216:1 216:7 216:13 227:24 Owner (1) 144:22 Owns (1) 163:2 Oxide (4)12:18 23:11 30:18 31:2 Oxides [3)23:7 23:8166:4 Oxiding (1) 175:5 Ozone [1) 55:19

172:6 172:6 189:6 190:22 192:7 192: 7 192:13195:14 Particulariy [10] 17:14 27:4 35:16 35:25 36:24 58 17154:6185:5193:14 201:20 Particulates [1] 15:20 Parties [1)21:15 Partnership P)37:1 173:17 201:7 Partnerships [5] 9:21 10:1 90:9 203:14 203:17 Parts

16:8 19:12 24:19 29:16 56:12 111 40:21

Parfy [21149:25180:7 P3SS [6] 46:10 104:5 141:2 145:8 219:23 229:22 Pass-through [2] 229:21 229:22 Passed [0] 12:8 23:7 37:22 55:16 105:8 106: 9 157:7 204:22 Passenger's [1] 142:l l Passengers r i ] 19:8 Passes (1) 104:8 Passing [1] 68:22 Passionate [11184.1 Past [16] 9:19 12:8 13:15 14:15 14:18 14: 19 16:7 16:14 16:21 48:18 71:20 79: 13148:21 152:16196:5199:22 Pataki [1)21:12 Patch [1] 21:16 Patchy [1] 50:24 Patii [3)71:14 71:15137:8 Paths m 71:10 71:13 71:18 71:19 71:22 72

Pathway (2)115:25124:9 Pattern [2] 42:8 62:21 Patterns (1) 63:8 Pave (1) 138:4 Pawn [1] 221:4 Pay [22] 10:0 10:6 38:19 73:21 75:20 93: 16 96:9 96:15 102:21 103:21 103:24 121:10 135:11 145:13 148:12 157:19 157:25 166:15 166:24 175:22 207:21 209:21 Pay-as-you-you-save [1)135:11 Pay-at-the-pump (3] 102:21 103:21 103:24 Paying [5] 103:6 144:13 144:14 156:17 156:

Payments [1] 135:12 Pays (1) 96:10 Peak 10] 96:5 96:6 96:9 96:10 97:10 103:

13 103:15159:17160:15 216:25 Peak-load [2)96:4 97:10 Peaks [2)12:15 46:11 Peari [1] 60:4 Peat

TTFT [2)187:24 187:25 Pacific [1)217:19 Pack [2)139:1 139:2 Packet [3] 7:18 50:4 168:8 Packets [2)26:3105:20 Paddles [1] 12:21 Page [3] 2:1 232:24 235:23 Pages (1) 235:21 Paid [3)106:11 209:12 212:9 Pain (1] 148:14 Painful [1) 173:11 Paint [1] 143:9 Painting [1] 143:6 Palatable [1] 176:3 Paleoclimate [1] 16:19 Palm [5] 73:18 73:19 164:25 165:2 165:3 Panel (20) 4:25 5:4 7:8 7:15 14:3 14:4 14:4 38:1 50:8 66:17 67:22 114:2 137:25 138:1 170:14 175:4 178:3 198:24 201:4 225:13 Panelists [4)50:2 50:18 66:13 99:16 Panels (4)4:8 67:24 105:9114:1 Paper [3144:15 164:6 106:23 Papers [1] 220:21 Papohaku [1] 48:25 Parallel [21190:14 195:18 Paralleled [1] 29:13 Paraphrase [11196:4 Paraphrasing [1] 203:1 Parenthood [1] 173:17 Parents (1) 83:21 Parify [4] 121:7 121:13 122:22 123:23 Parte [4)48:21 47:13 47:23 71:4 Parks [1] 208:8 Part [34] 3:13 3:15 29:19 30:1 30:2 30:23 49:10 55:10 66:12 63:17 69:2 74:3 74:5 74:10 74:20 81:13 83:25 86:21 91:13 92:8 95:7 104:21 108:21 111: 15 143:6 143:12 146:9 177:19 195: 25 196:1 199:18 204:8 223:6 229:2 Participants [1] 27:5 Participate [3)149:8 204:24 228:19 Participated [2)200:5 200:8 Participating [3)43:3149:5 221:19 Participation t l ) 202-.20 Particular [18] 30:10 35:16 37:5 62:23 65:11 111:7 113:15 118:18 119:20 124:11

^ .

:iI73:19 ' 'eer

:i] 155:11 'enalize

[1] 221:24 Pending -1)89:11 'enguin

[1] 149:26 Penny (2) 196:24 196:24 people [10713:14 4:3 4:7 4:18 5:11 7:13 10: 12 10:19 10:21 13:10 13:12 18:25 21: 14 21:16 21:17 26:2 35:6 51:10 65: 21 66:24 67:2 67:8 69:6 79:8 83:18 84:6 84:8 85:12 85:12 85:16 88:20 92:21 102:2 102:6 102:16 103:1 108: 9 109:4 113:8 113:16 126:3 132:21 132:23 133:8 134:8 137:25 139:3 139:7 142:10 142:21 145:5 145:9 148:5 148:23 160:10 160:14 161:13 151:20 153:3 153:21 153:24 154:10 154:14 154:16 155:2 155:4 155:7 155:24 156:19 156:25 157:2 157:10 167:11 157:24 158:1 158:3 158:20 158:21 162:24 164:23 166:14 166:15 166:22 167:1167:10 171:20 173:20 177:1 177:3 177:8 177:23 180:9 180: 17 164:1 185:2 185:6 185:0 185:11 166:3 101:14 106:15 212:1 212:11 213:5 219:12 221:24 235:18 people's

[1] 161:17 Pepperdine [1125:6 Per [49] 19:8 19:12 19:14 30:1 30:7 39: 11 39:13 39:14 39:18 39:20 39:22 66: 12 65:24 77:18 97:4 107:12 120:12 120:18 126:23 126:1 126:22 142:1 144:6 144:7 152:17 160:13 161:14 151:18 161:21 162:4 162:17 162:20 163:20 195:20 196:20 196:21 196:22 207:23 210:18 210:23 210:25 211:1 211:4 211:6 211:7 211:24 222:14 236:4 226:18 Perceive [^ 79:23 06:2 Perceived (2)136:18149:7 Percent p6] 14:10 19:4 19:6 19:7 19:15 22: 22 33:5 33:10 33:12 33:15 33:17 33: 21 34:1 34:3 69:21 77:6 77:7 04:22 94:25 04:25 95:9 95:11 95:13 120:6 124:21 124:23 125:1 125:3 125:6 125:19 125:23 126:21 127:6 128:21 128:23 128:24 141:6 141:10 141:16 141:19 141:19 142:3 142:5 142:8 142:18 142:20 142:25 144:5 148:19 148:24 148:25 149:4 146:8 140:13 162:18 156:1 156:14 156:15 156:17 156:19 160:1 160:16 162:0 163:0 164:10 166:13 172:9 178:10 185:15 207:22 207:23 211:10 211:13 211:15 218:0 218:9 Percentage (5) 32:18 69:21 128:20 102:9 207:13 Perception P) 25:16 158:13 Perched [1)45:21 Perhaps 8)40:15 47:11 64:13 83:8123:1 180:

i 3 195:17 226:2 Period [10) 16:2 17:25 40:17 42:12 43:16 51: 3 51:10 57:22 98:5 216:25 Periods [3)53:2103:13103:15 Permits ra] 92:23 03:14 103:7 Permitt ing [2)37:11 101:25 Person [51 34:25 153:7 170:8 179:7179:8 Personal (7) 6:24 22:18 54:13 140:2 145:2146: 5166:10

• ECO IRP Technical Session; 6/1 l^ersonally [5] 19:9 151:5 163:24 154:14 169:21 Perspective (32) 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:13 6:5 16:19 37: 0 64:16 67:24 67:25 68:1 68:2 68:15 78.11 78:14 87:3 87:6 87.17 87:23 87:24 90:1 90:10 90:19 90:21 91:4 90:20 200:4 203:12 203:18 204:21 213:25 222:22 Petroleum [6] 64:19 65:17 80:2 107:9 159:25 160:12 Phase [9] 29:12 29:20 29:21 29:22 30:19 122:16190:8 200:23 224:16 Philosophy ra 139:19 186:19 Phone

119:6140:24141:1 lones

p ] 118:25 140:22 183:20 Phonetic [1] 186:3 Photosynthesis [1] 163:6 Photovoltaic [5] 116:25 208:8 212:1 213:13 225:24 Photovoltaics [5] 119:11119:15 120:4 125:13 128:8 Physicist

[4)73:24 140:3152:4152:15 Picked [4] 26:3 50:4 139:3 210:12 Picking [2] 8:22 139:2 Pickle [1] 162:14 Pickups [ l j 152:12 Picture [S} 19:22 121:11 130:6 139:15 139:15 Pictures ? } : ' " ' ' [41129:5129:25134:2148:4 Piece [4] 99:4 130:14133:16 147:16 Pieces [2] 16:10 99:2 Pig [2] 144:18 144:21 Pigs [ I ] 144:20 Pike

(1149:14 Plies [11 46:14 Pilot [11122:16 Pfnch

K ' ,41:11 inpolnted

^ & ' ' [ I I ] 74:15 74:18 143:18 162:12 169: 4 169:0 169:8 169:10 169:11 169:14 171:20 Pipes (1] 197:9 Pizzas 11 67:9

190:13 200:25 202:1 202:20 232:18 Plane [2172:11 117:20 Planet [20] 9:14 11:11 43:20 55:1 61:9 73: 25 78:1 78:2 81:21 86:3 91:13 91:14 102:9 102:14 108:15 113:8 128:10 150:18173:17 173:18 Planned [2)67:11 173:17 Planner [1] 34:22 Planners [1176:18 Planning (35) 1:0 3:9 3:13 3:15 3:24 4:15 6:13 6:14 6:18 25:11 28:3 30:19 38:13 40: 9 40:11 40:12 41:8 45:7 72:12 169: 25 192:12 192:21 193:3 193:5 193: 12 201:16 202:11 225:22 230:17 231: 2 232:7 232:9 235:3 235:9 235:14 Plans (15) 54:1 109:5 190:7 194:7 194:25 195:2 195:6 195:13 198:2 196:3 203: 12 230:14 230:23 230:25 231:3 Plant P3] 22:4 33:24 48:6 48:7 71:3 72:21 73:1 73:3 73:16 77:1 80:1 81:20 81: 20 85:11 94:11 104:25122:12122: 24 123:9 125:2 125:4 162:14 163:6 163:20 164:19 164:25 165:2 165:25 166:1 166:5 166:6 171:16 176:8 Planted [1185:11 Planting [»165:16 166:16 Plants [10) 72:3 72:4 73:24 65:10 104:4 118; 9 161:17161:20 165:11 165:20 Plastics [1] 178:20 Plate [1] 140:18 Platform [2)7:9186:17 Play [7] 2:23 20:18 168:21 193:7 190:7 199:2 227:15 Played [1] 204:7 Players [2)76:5167:1 Pleasure [11146:14 Pledge [11 06:21 Plenfy (1)161:23 Plug (1) 129:12 Plus (6) 15:17 39:19 39:21 42:18 81:22 107:10 PM [3)113:24 233:3 235:11 Pocket [1] 132:12 Pocketbook [2)158:2158:20 Point [43] 9:10 11:24 13:10 13:18 17:6 17: 20 21:10 24:25 25:5 26:6 41:3 41:25 46:20 47:15 66:5 57:24 66:8 68:9 76: 7 76:6 88:2 97:7 96:11 100:7 101:21 107:4 120:25 121:8 132:25 138:2 149:14 163:18 165:8 176:8 160:22 185:25 193:16 196:6 198:20 200:3 205:25 214:6 229:20 Pointed (6)57:21 59:3 71:1 74:11 177:17 197: 6 Pointer [1] 202:11 Pointing [1) 57:20 Points 16] 10:10 44:24 68:7 121:6 125:12 197:7 Polar

• 1 1 ^

Ph<

PJ

U . Jace [18)21:21 22:15 22:16 24:10 42:9 43: 4 68:19 76:2 80:1 81:20 81:24 134: 23 143:22 150:20 170:16 170:18 203: 8 207:21 Places [0] 37:12 71:18 81:21 83:11 106:17 100:12175:20182:16 Plan [17] 8:9 29:23 30:3 30:6 30:10 30:10 67:15 67:17 75:15 98:25 136:9 189:5

[4)16:916:2217:1417:17 Policies I [13] 61:12 61:25 87:17 103:22 131:3 135:5 170:18 196:5 199:13 200:1 204:8 204:22 204:22 | Policy [55] 2:9 3:9 3:25 4:11 7:13 18:24 19: 2 21:3 22:15 25:10 25:18 62:1 66:17 67:22 68:14 87:19 88:23 88:24 89:4 69:21 90:2 90:4 91:5 100:2 111:19 127:1 146:14 153:11 150:11 169:14 189:11 169:14 189:16 190:4 190:14 190:17 191:24 191:25 192:2 192:8 193:22 198:1 199:19 200:14 200:16 201:16 201:18 202:10 202:23 202:23 204:6 204:13 206:1 220:25 229:3 Policymaker [1] 220:24 Policymakers [1] 153:17 Pollhale (1) 48:25 Political [5] 87:18 88:15 68:17 89:14 92:7 Politically [1] 93:13 Poll p ) 148:18 149:12 149:13 Polls Pl 69:5 69:6 153:21 Pollution [3)75:7 75:7101:3 PoWethvlene [1] 169:9 Ponds [1)165:22 Poo-pooing (1) 13:6 Pool [5] 49:6 49:10 49:14 49:17 182:9 Pools [1)46:0 Poor p) 84:7 84:25 Pooriy P) 44:8 44:10 59:22 Popcorn [2] 144:20 144:22 Popped [1] 70:10 Popular [1)212:16 Population ( I l f 159:23 170:8 172:11172:13 172; 20 172:23 173:1 173:2 173:8 173:15 173:16 Population's [1] 164:22 Portfolio [5] 22:21 71:16 94:20 109:23 226:3 Portfolios r i ] 19:18 Portion [4] 104:9 137:8 177:15 190:20 Portugal M) 212:16 Portuguese [1) 128:6 Position ra) 173:16 220.12 220:23 Positive [6) 11:23 24:5 41:15 102:5 146:10 183:10 I Possibilit ies (4) 102:12 104:13 104:19 122:10 Possibilify [2) 67:7 228:3 Possible [11] 24:20 36:18 57:17 89.3 101:0 123:6 130:13 143:12 184:10 164:19 186:16 I Possibfy I [7] 34:25 96:24 185:20 215:10 225: 17 226:24 226:24 Post (1) 53:24 Posted [2)54:3 76:16

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/ W Potential [21) 23:2 31:2 31:5 31:7 64:6 60:9 116:20 118:17 121:15 121:16 121:23 123.6123:7 123:11 127:12129:25 130:8 130:20 167:6 224:17 230:19 Potentially M] 40:11 61:21 58:8 59:25 Pound (1)179:16 Pounds [1)77:5 Pouring [1160:16 Power [91110:10 26:6 33:8 68:7 60:9 69:14 71:3 72:21 73:1 73:3 73:16 73:23 74: 14 78:19 77:1 77:6 78:6 80:1 80:7 80: 10 80:12 83:19 95:1 100:7 104:3 106: 22 111:2 118:9 122:12 123:6 125:2 125:4 131:23 142:19 142:20 146:17 158:8 160:6 162:13 166:1 166:5 166: 6 176:2 176:23 178:7 178:16 185:25 198:20 206:20 206:22 207:9 207:13 207:13 207:16 207:22 206:17 208:19 209:12 209:24 210:4 210:7 210:16 210:16 211:2 211:16 211:22 212:2 212:23 214:1 214:3 214:6 214:7 215: 22 216:23 216:1 216:1 216:3 216:7 216:7 216:0 216:12 216:13 217:0 217:10 217:26 226:17 226:13 227:20 228:6 228:12 228:14 Powered [2)125:15 209:11 Powerful [3i31:3 165:10 177:7

(4)214:13 214:21 214:22 214:25 PPAs (1) 228:6 Practical (1)116:7 Practically [1)180:18 Practice [2] 31:0 216:4 Practices [2)216:6 217:13 Preceding [1] 205:7 Precipitation (3)13:1817:1018:22 Precise [1] 62:21 Precision (2) 37:9 37:10 Predict (1)48:13 Predicting (1)47:12 Predictions [5112:1 12:2 41:5 160:17 172:22 Prefer [1] 118:5 Prelndustrial [1)19:12 Preliminary [7] 28:12 20:14 32:13 33:25 34:11 36: 12 200:19 Prep (1) 169:25 Preparation [1)191:11 Prepare (1) 169:20 Prepared [5] 34:5 50:6 169:22 198:20 108:22 Preparedness (1) 80:8 Prescribe f l ) 54:23 Present ;81 28.18 43:6 66:26 67:2 60:19 116: 19183:6 235:18 presentation 37) 6:1 8:16 26:8 27:4 26:7 35:11 36: .0 53:24 65:25 61:2 66:10 76:15 78: 5 87:11 91:3 108:20 114:23 115:16 128:8 128:16 137:10 137:11 146:24

185:12 196:12 198:14 iy8:21198:23 199:1 206:11 209:5 209:10 209:16 210:2 226:18 229:9 232:21 Presentation's [1] 28:25 Presentations [8] 26:6 29:3 54:1 66:13 67:23 68:4 113:19 201:4 Presented [2)20:15 200:17 Presenting [1] 7:3 Preservation [1] 89:9 Preset [2)97:9 210:17 President 11)115:13 Pressure [2)155:11 155:12 Presumably [2)65:4 106:6 Presume [1] 94:19 Pretend [1)191:10 Pretfy (17) 16:3 16:4 53:7 53:13 54:17 119: 21 128:25132:1 151:15154:16 156: 9 159:6 166:19 169:6 204:4 206:18 228:11 Prevent [4)22:3151:16 180:9 206:5 Prevented r i ] 180:22 Previous [2)69:19 187:18 Price [16] 72:21 72:24 84:3 84:4 84:18 92: 17 92:23 96:9 103:7 105:11 148:13 148:13 146:13 156:22 157:25 175:22 Prices [5] 96:6 07:9 97:10 102:1 106:15 Pricing [10] 70:25 95:17 96:1 96:4 97:12 97; 15103:2103:3 149:6 206:20 Primarify (7) 11:14 20:13 30:8 33:13 34:12 120: 16 230:5 Primary [4)30:16 54:22 54:22 200:10 Primer [1] 9:2 Principally [ I ] 62:11 Principle [2)99:4 112:2 Principles [1)31:25 Print [4)110:3 110:17 213:3 234:10 Printed [2)110:12 110:13 Priorify [5] 35:21 35:21 102:17 112:18 112:19 Prius [1] 126:14 Private [1] 89:21 Prize [2)163:3 197:25 Pro P l 211:12 211:15 Probabllify (1) 170:4 Problem [45] 9:22 9:25 20:4 21:4 22:10 24:8 46:10 49:20 51:21 61:1170:13 72:4 60:22 90:1 93:4 101:4 101:13 101:18 101:19 101:23 102:25 112:20 113:1 113:5 144:20 149:2 153:3 153:4 153: 5 153:24 154:2 154:12 154:18 158: 13160:4161:5 161:6161:25163:13 173:25 174:7 181:5 181:16 209:23 228:17 Problem's [1] 60:6 Problems

11)88:1188:15 90:12 97:19100:20 100:20 164:16 164:18 180:6 183:2 229:8 Procedures [1)72:12 Proceed [1)91:18 Proceedings [61 4:21 4:22 199:11 234:8 234:9 234 12 Process [641 2:21 2:21 3:9 3:13 3:16 3:17 4: 15 6:9 6:14 31:21 75:16 76:10 77:20 80:11 89:3 92:8 117:2 127:16 161:2 162:16169:6169:21 169:24 171:10 187:1 188:15 188:16 189:5 189:15 189:20 190:2 190:3 190:5 190:18 190:25 191:3 191:4 191:8 191:13 191:23 192:2 192:21 193:8 193:12 193:15 194:2 194:5 194:17 194:22 195:11 195:22196:9 198:25 200:2 203:14 204:25 214:4 214:8 215:10 219:18 225:22 230:2 230:17 232:7 Processes (5) 77:15 120:1 200:6 204:9 204:25 Processing [2] 48:6 48:7 Procurement (1) 164:15 Produce [10] 124:20 126:21 126:24 127:1 127; 2 129:2 129:21 161:20 165:10 225:4 Produced [6] 77:19 130:25 132:9 132:10 165: 19 204:13. Producer (1) 144:23 Producer's [1] 214:7 Producers P) 111:3 210:17 211:2 Produces (1)72:22 Producing p) 137:5 162:6 207:16 Product [5] 19:14 76:9 111:24 133:3 133:7 Production [20] 24:6 31:20 33:24 36:2 74:23 78: 23 118:20 119:5 124:18 124:19 126: 18 152:17 152:22 159:18 159:20 160: 13161:0165:14 172:14 192:16 Products [13] 64:7 64:19 64:19 65:17 106:6 116:24 124:24 132:17 133:10 133:13 134:15164:6 179:24 Professional [1] 35:2 Professionals (4)34:15 88:1213:1218:23 Proflle [1] 226:23 Proflt (1)211:14 Proflts [13] 68:21 70:22 72:25 73:9 93:9 97: 14 07:21 217:24 218:2 218:5 218:8 218:13 218:15 Program P6] 20:8 21:20 27:19 28:1 29:8 29: 14 29:15 29:18 34:13 34:13 35:19 54: 10 63:24 66:1 85:23 91:18 94:1 94:4 96:23 97:4 114:20 122:2 136:13 137: 13 152:22 182:5 162:7 162:11 201: 19 203:7 203:22 204:2 207:12 207: 12 206:3 210:15 Programs [10] 20:5 23:3 01:11 83:15 85:22 135: 11 149:6 207:11 213:2 218:21 Progress [2)30:13 148:21 Progressive [1] 186:21 Project (38) 18:17 28:10 28:12 29:7 29:12 29: 24 30:1 30:1 30:14 34:1943:12 61:6 200:18 200:23 200:23 201:5 202:1 203:8 208:17 208:16 208:25 209.13 210:10 210:21 210:22 211:9 211:11

211:11211:15 211:19213:25 214:9 214:15 214:23 215:23 215:24 216:1 216:6 Projected [3)32:5 45:2 45:5 Projection [2] 45:3 52:24 Projections (4)17:3 18:12 58:17 59:1 Projects (26) 19:24 134:9 134:22 176:22 166: 19 201:17 205:19 206:20 206:24 207 19 207:25 200:6 208:24 210:7 210:8 211:3 211:4 211:16 211:22 213:16 213:20 213:20 214:10 215:20 216:11 216:13 Promise (2)27:1 171:14 Promote (6) 102:23 105:8 131:4 134:1 134:23 172:8 Promoti"ng (2)180:1 218:2 Prompted [1] 227:4 Prompts [2)155:3 227:4 Propaganda [3)112:6 213:16 213:17 Propane (1) 33:2 Properiy [1)63:11 Proponents p) 70:23 108:20 108:22 Proportional [^35:14 07:8 Proposal [2)81:4 204:5 Proposals p ] 80:25 107:6 201:12 Propose (4)77:4 138:7 138:18 201:16 Proposed [1)71:3 Proprietary [1] 36:18 Protect [2)72:2112:25 Protection [4] 2:13 29:14 87:4 87:0 Protest [2] 183:24 184:6 Protests [1)183:13 Protocol [5] 21:5 23:18 55:16 92:12 93:24 Protocols (1)30:11 Proud [1] 107:14 Prove [1)177:9 Provide [20] 28:10 31:9 64:10 118:17 125:14 130:6 162:23 165:3 191:22 192:25 193:8 193:9 195:3 199:1 200:11 202: 25 220:15 224:20 225:10 231:13 Provided [8] 29:25 30:24 220:20 222:11 222: 25 223:1 231:21 232:22 Provides [2)123:9 193:4 Providing [1)221:18 Provision [1] 222:9 Prudent [1)41:7 Psychology [1] 155:1 Public (34) 3:16 9:23 19:2 22:15 25:10 25: 16 25:18 27:7 30:9 34:17 61:25 61: 25 69:4 70:21 71:2 72:12 82:24 90:2 105:2 153:11 153:21 155:6 169:5 193:18 196:9 199:7 208:21 213:11 213:11 213:21 217:22 218:23 232:20

-23^!B public-private [1] 9:21 Publish [1)110:26 Published [1)44:16 Publishing

(21) 6:21104:5105:13191:5192:6 193:19 193:23 193:26 194:1 194:1 196:4 196:14 107:15 201:6 229:18 230:2 230:4 230:18 230:20 231:1 231:4 PUC's [3)198:13 230:8 Pull [6] 139:18 139:23 139:25 147:14 158: 1 186:19 Pulled 11)151:14 pul l ing [3] 60:6 140:9 Pump [71 80:17 102:21 103:2 103:11 103: 21103:24124:20 pumping [I ] 169:23 pumps [2)05:2136:22 punahou [2)185:21 185:22 Purchase ( I I ) 133:10 167:13 167:15 206:22 207:13 209:7 209:10 210:16 214:1 228:6 228:12 Purchasing [1)209:22 Pure (1)130:17 Purely (1)41:24 Purpose (6) 3:11 6:2 28:20 29:1 30:14 134:12 Ptjrposes [4)23:22 37:11 116:7 222:7 Pursuant [1] 235:12 Pursue [2)36:5130:10 Pursuing P) 130:2 134:17 134:26 Push -9] 126:15 131:4 134:23 139:19 139: ^0106:20 193:23194:2 197:22 Pushes [1] 145:25 Pushing [1] 167:1 Put P3] 11:0 20:12 22:15 22:16 22:10 24: 9 39:15 42:14 66:24 91:2 110:20 111: 25 121:22 121:25 126:1 125:8 133: 10 150:25 161:1 162:24 163:9 164:4 165:16 176:10 209:8 209:0 220:11 227:12 228:7 226:15 230:26 232:22 Puts P) 16:10 61:4 161:25 Putt ing 11) 7:22 20:13 55:25 70:19 08:2 123: 12143:12179:21 101:15201:2 215: 21 Puzzle [1] 228:10 PV 17] 97:25 119:22 120:10 120:19 120:

i l 121:7 121:7121:15121:25122: 20 122:21 122:23 123:1 123:2 123: 21 126:9 215:12 Pyramid [1) 139:9 Pyramids [1) 173:2

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/ M Qualified [1] 26:24 Qualify [5] 32:23 35:3 81:23 96:17 133:3 Quantifled (1) 10:24 Quantify [1] 23:1 Quantities [1)117:10 Quantify (2)92:16 62:19 Quarter

S] 156:18 uarters

(1) 107:16 Quasi [1] 190:8 Quasi-judicial [1] 199:6 Question's [1] 53:16 Question-and-answer

g] 114:4 uestlon-writer

[1] 113:6 Questionable [1] 183:6 Questioned [3] 13.12 149:4 186:25 Questions

?m 6:3 6:5 5:6 6:2 50:10 50:16 64: 1 65:20 66:10 07:12 99:19 113:15

113:21 168:6 168:6 170:8 174:22 178:22 185:16 185:16 166:1 191:19 102:10 195:16 195:24 219:10 220:1 220:6 232:12 Quick [3)10:10 55:7155:25 Quickly [10] 27:1 36:17 30:22 137:20 165:6 166:10 184:12 185:4 186:13 217:7 Quit [1] 187:8 Quite [16] 7:16 10:20 11:15 14:12 67:17 68; 10 95:15 146:7 148:20 159:13 188: 18 193:25 200:2 206:6 206:15 232:6 Quote [61 69:16 77:22 95:2 172:15 163:11

Quotes (1) 220:7 Quotient [1] 226:5

[1)101:14 Raises p]47:1 66:6183:2 Raleigh [13] 2:20 115:2 159:3 159:10 159:12 169:13 174:4 174:12 174:16 175:12 175:17175:19 181:25 Rampaging [1)71:25 Range (B) 3:15 6:14 17:7 45:8 116:10 I H : 20 232:9 232:16 Ranges [1] 127:19 Ranked [1] 76:24 Ranks [1)77:1 Rapid [2] 55:21 65:22 Rapidly ^ ) 68:8 74:25 119:5 165:12

[1] 71:23 Rate [20] 9:1 38:23 39:17 39:22 41:17 42: 1 42:3 44:17 52:15 52:16 62.19 121: 2 121:3 156:3 156:9 156:15 171:1 211:23 211:24 229:10 Rate-sharing [1] 229:10 Ratepayer [2] 74:2 74:4 Ratepayer's [1)110:4 Ratepayers (4) 104:6 104:8 110:10 229:11 Ratepayers' [ I ] 199:10 Rates (5) 41:3 65:24 156:12 156:13 175:22 Rather ( I I ) 11:16 14:23 23.6 35:7 64:25 168; 7 175:6 190:4 222:19 229:22 230:4 Reach P] 160:2 183:20 227:13 Reached [1] 180:1 Reaching [I ] 180:4 Read [ I I ] 26:25 32:4 35:7 50:7 94:21 98: 16112:17 161:4164:2191:11 229:9 Readily

I9 l22: i5 i23: l7 l25:3 '128: in28:9 ' 128:12 128:18 128:21 129:25 130:15 130:20 131:3 132:22 133:2 133:12 133:25 134:23 135:4 135:13 136:9 136:19 137:1 137:9 139:16 139:24 140:7 141:2 145:7 145:25 146:22 147:14 148:4 149:9 152:13 163:13 153:14 154:1 155:22 156:25 156:24 157:3 158:8 158:11 161:3 181:6 163: 13 167:16 172:20 175:20 177:16 I H : 24 177:25 102:22 183:21 184:1 164: 0 184:8 104:8 164:11 184:11185:1 185:16 186:20 186:21 167:1 187:5 187:12 191:15 197:11 197:16 197:26 197:25 203:18 203:19 206:12 207:6 207:7 209:2 209:2 213:8 213:11 214: 14 215:17 218:24 220:10 220:11 220: 25 231:9 I Reason I [11] 12:11 36:4 92:18 93:10 108:21 121:19 139:3 177:1 228:12 228:12 229:15 Reasonable (1) 98:14 Reasons

24:18 34:5 105:3 176:3 179:15 80:15180:21 I

Rebate | [4] 97:3 97:8 157:17 157;:21 Rebates I [6] 81:11 105:8 105:14 131:13 134: 21135:10 I REC I [5] 208:20 208:21 208:25 209:7 210:5 Recalculation [2)28:13 200:20 Recanted [1)13:13 Recapture [1)119:2 Received (3)188:12 201:11232:17 Recent i [13] 13:1514:2 18:4 28.12 38:21 39: 640:7 54:9 148:18 152:19 194:10 194:19 200:19 Recentiy [3)12:7 31:15 39:4 Recess [6] 50:11 66:14 99:24 113:23 107:24 219:11 Recirculated [1] 85:5 Reciting [1] 196:4 Reckoning [1)71:20 Recognition [2] 5:21 35:1 Recognize [4] 7:10 62:7 67:19 78:8 Recognizing (1) 90:7 Recommend [1)45:6 Recommendation [4] 190:12 202:3 220:14 220:19 Recommendations I [5] 29:4 189:21 200:11 200:24 202:19 Recommended [2] 202:1 220:6 Recommending [3)30:19196:11219:22 Recommissioning [1)136:16 Reconciliation [1] 08:5 Record [3)43:5 70:22140:13 Recorded Recorder [2] 114:6 205:22 Recover [2)175:25175:25 Recovering [1] 159:5 Recovery rssJ^

[4] 2:8 2:14 2:20 2:25

Racheting [1)23:12 Racism [1] 170:11 Radiated [2)11:211:4 Radiation [4)10:2511:7 11:0 31:4 Radiative [1)14:17 Radio [4)148:25147:3158:5 213:3 Rahmstorf [1)44:15 Rain 6145:12 45:13 45:23 46:7 46:10 65: S Rained [1)45:22 Rainfall J8) 45:24 47:18 52:8 52:10 52:11 52: 2152:23 53:8 Rainforest P) 73:19 74:25 75:2 Rainforests

n f l l f l A ' [7118:18 47:4 84:3 85:1 85:16 91:9 102:1 Raised

(1) 06:2 Rei eading [2)08:12 225:7 Ready [2)122:1181:11 Reaffirmation (1) 89:20 Real [22)7:11 7:12 9:4 10:210:2 37:21 57; 7 67:8 69:7 70:24 77:21 82:17 100:3 109:7 134:17 165:3 167:16 186:16 193:22 213:19 213:10 227:4 Realistic P] 57:3 109:8 Realify (6) 22:14 61:3 69:4 78:21102:10 107:

Realization [1] 39:3 Realize p) 180:8 166:4 230:3 Realized [2] 70:16 80:0 Really (150) 6:1 6:6 6:7 6:16 10:12 10:24 13: 17 16:23 18:5 19:11 19:20 21:2 22:6 22:26 22:25 23:12 23:23 25:26 32:22 34:20 35:23 36:2 37:7 30:14 42:10 48:19 49:7 49:10 49:12 40:18 51:16 57:11 61:8 61:15 63:15 64:2 64:6 64: 18 69:11 70:6 80:23 82:2 83:4 84:13 86:9 67:11 87:12 88:2 88:8 68:8 89: 15 90:13 92:14 07:9 98:11 09:16 103: 12 104:10 104:20 109:10 109:17 109:

So

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/ ^ l1J-20:22 Recreation

[2)208:14 228:6 Rectifled [1)61:24 Recyclable [1] 178:4 Recycle [7] 76:11 152:2 152:5 152:8 152:20 158:18178:12 Recycled P) 152:1 166:1 156:5 Recycling [15] 152:13 156:3 156:9 166:15 178: 4 178:13 178:14 178:17 178:18 178: 20 178:20 179:4 181:5 181:12 181:18 Red [5] 19:3 41:12 44:21 44:24 46:13 Redeflning Ml 109.2 Redemption [2)152:9156:12 Reda [1] 15:7 Reduce [35] 15:12 19:11 24:7 65:9 78:23 79: 4 84:10 84:11 88:25 91:7 92:20 93: 16 93:22 93:23 03:25 94:1 106:26 118:2 120:6 125:24 128:10 130:24 133:23 136:17 152:20 166:8 168:23 189:12 192:17 194:24 200:24 204:9 224:1 224:5 230:16 Reduced [81 23:21 74:12 93:5 93:8 126:2 130: 2134:20 234:10 Reduces [4)85:6116:12 116:13135:20 Reducing (5) 36:22 134:3 177:4 202:14 221:22 Reduction [12] 29:19 30:7 30:13 30:20 36:24 37: 2 02:11 126:18 192:16 195:21 200:1 202:2 Reductions (12) 24:6 54:10 55:4 55:12 118:18 124:11 134:19 189:19 190:18 192:13 193:11 223:16 Redundant [1] 99:8 Reef (1) 69:22 Reefs (2) 75:8 149:19 Refer [2] 38:3 66:5 Reference [2)99:7149:14 Referred [1] 199:21 Referring [1)53:21 Refers [2)69:2 72:20 Reflne [2)76:24 124:24 Refined (1)111:24 Reflner [1] 103:5 Reflners tl]111:23 Reflne ry [1] 106:9 Reflnlng [1)103:5 Reflect [4)97:11 143:7 144:2 204:4 Reflected (1) 72:23 Reflecting (1)33:17 Reflection [1)11:3 Reflective p ) 74:2 143:8 Reforest

[1] 85:9 ReforesUtion [3)81:18 85:7 209:24 Reforms ri ] 95:17 Refrigeration [1)125:13 Refrigerator [1) 97:2 Refrigerators [2] 20:1 96:23 Regard (3164:1202:12 215.8 Regarding (6) 101:11 190:18 192:13 193:6 221: 19 233:1 Regardless P) 69:3 170:19 178:16 Regards [1] 207:8 Regenerative (1) 116:6 Region (2)17:22161:24 Regional [5] 21:7 52:22 53:8 63:13 89:24 Regions [6] 16:22 17:14 17:17 51:1174:2 174: 10 Registered (11111:12 Registration [1] 231:15 Registries [1)111:9 Regreening [1)81:18 Regressive [1] 24:24 Regret (2) 36:2 79:16 Regular (1) 62:25 Regulate [11111:16 Regulated [6] 3:17 35:21 36:3 93:16 93:17 93:22 Regulation [0] 72:15 64:2 84:20 84:24 85:2 101: 1 101:15105:23 Regulations [5] 24:12 25:16 85:15 101:12 222:19 Regulators (I) 107:23 Regulatory [12)2:21 24:14 37:10 104:7 105:15 112:21 112:22 112:25 168:16 199:8 109:11 222:7 Reinvent

K) 216:3 elate

[3)204:8 204:10 204:22 Related ( I I ) 3:20 12:19 32:9 35:14 37:4 61:5 64:25 89:12 102:13 171:2 199:14 Relates [2)153:23 217:13 Relating [1] 147:25 Relations (1) 62:5 Relationship P) 31:1343:11 Relationships (IJ 191:7 Relative p ) 33:5 185:17 Relatively (7)43:22 47:11 55:21 55:22 126:17 164:16 216:8 Released (4)12:16 56:5 74.19112:12 Releases [3)76:3 75:4 112:9 Relevant [4)64:8 217:15 217:16 217:17 Reliabilify

[4) 98:19 96::i0 194:11 195:1 Reliable [1] 195:3 Reluctant (1) 133:10 Rely (1) 167:4 Remain [4)19:23 34:10 35:22 112:21 t^emainder [2] 28:7 165:19 Remaining (1) 165:14 Remains [I ] 23:17 Remark [1)101:11 Remarks [5)2:1 2:25 3:1 188:4 231:18 Remember [ I I ) 45:15 58:16 78:2 87:24 133:4 158:21 163:8 167:14 165:23 168:8 229:20 Remind [4] 26:2 26:4 50:3 68:6 Reminder [1] 89:14 Reminding [1] 155:4 Remiss (1135:19 Removed [2)20:3 147:16 Removes [1] 228:20 Rendered [1] 220:22 Renewable [82] 2:15 2:16 19:21 22:21 24:4 24:6 24:9 35:24 64:19 77:11 79:19 80:4 80:18 80:25 81:2 81:16 67:1 94:11 94:20 94:23 95:2 95:10 95:12 95:22 106:22 108:1 109:2 109:3 109:12 109:22 110:16 114:15 114:16 115:4 115:9 115:10 115:16 116:2 116:3 116:4 116:0 116:10 116:15 117:17 119:10 121:15 121:21 123:7 127:10 130:3 130:12 130:15 130:18 134:2 139:13 145:20 146:7 148:10 149:5 167:5 172:15 174:25 175:8 177:21 182:4 205:16 206:21 207:15 207:16 207:24 208:13 208:14 209:13 210:10 211:21 216:4 216:16 217:3 217:21 218:21 218:22 226:17 Renewables [6] 70:24 71:16 72:14 112:24 124:3 195:15 Renewal [1)79:14 Renewed (1) 24:5 Rent

[4)87:10103:18 105:12109:6 Reparable [1] 175:24 Repeat (2) 220:2 220:3 Rephrased [1)226:15 [Replace [6] 49:7 75:22 95:3 133:17 135:25 140:6 Replacement [1] 131:24 Replacing (4) 49:13 64:18 120:19 143:20 Replanted [1)31:21 Replanting [1)175:6 Report [12f9:16 10:13 16:17 18:4 31:9 38: 18 63:21 53:22 58:16 58:24 59:4 227: 25 Reported [3)1:24 31:11 34:3

Reporter (9) 4:21 26:25 50:9 99:18 128:5 188: 22 219:8 232:4 234:18 Reporters (2) 36:21 36:21 Reporting [1] 36:19 Reports [2)110:24 189:20 Reposition

tl) 186:20 (epos ted

[1)S7:15 Represent [2] 35:17 44:24 Representative [ lo f 2:11 6:11 7:10 27:6 68:1 86:24 87:7 91:7 91:21 199:10 Represented P) 94:23 94:24 Representing [2) 42.1 68:7 Represents (6) 36:1 41:16 44:22 44:23 160:14 234:11 Reproduce [2)40:23 165:9 Republican p ] 21:13 61:22 REQUESTED

K) 235:19 equire

[8] 37:22 62:24 82:14 106:25 168:19 160:3 230:9 230:11 Required [31132:8181:13 230:15 Requirement [8] 24:11 83:23 94:5 94:22 135:1 193 22 224:9 230:7 Requirements P) 24:15 61:16 91:24 Requires p) 84:9 229:18 Requiring (3) 132:7 229:16 229:16 Rescued [1] 63:9 Research (17) 2:2 3:2 3:7 20:14 20:15 20:17 35 I 36:21 59:13 61:4 66:8 68:3 90:2 90: 16118:5159:6 216:23 Resent [1)221:7 Resentful [1] 139:21 Reserves (1) 59:21 Reside [2] 46:18 46:19 Residence [ I ] 107:16 Residences [1)81:14 Residential ( I I ) 32:20 83:10 105:9 120:10 121:7 122:20 123:1 126:9 127:5 129:7 129: 13 Residual [1] 124:25 Resigned (1) 164:14 Resiliency [1] 64:3 Resolution [1] 47:17 Resolved [2110:1 180:24 Resolving [1169:21 Resort [1)49:5 Resorts P] 49:6 49:16 49:22 Resource [38] 1:8 3:9 3:13 4:14 6:13 6:17 25 I I 28:3 34:12 38:13 49:23 60:7 72 12 107:5116:19116:19117:5117 18 117:10 189:5 190:7 192:12 192

21-193:3193:5193:12 203:11207: 17 224:15 224:17 230:12 230:14 230: 17 232:7 232:18 235:3 235:9 235:14 Resourced P) 204:19 222:12 Resources [281 25:20 27:22 29:5 35:24 37:11 37 23 59:24 84:24 79:10 80:21 81:3 81: 25 107:1 107:5 106:1 111:5 115:19 116:6 116:11 116:15 116:18 127:14 130:3 159:17 109:18 224:9 226:1 230:12 Respect [2)169:21 221:14 Respectable [1) 38:23 Respectively [1] 76:25 Respond [12) 148:14 153:3 153:19 155:8 155: 12 165:24 156:19 168:1 170:13 186: 12 221:1222:25 Responded [2] 174:15 222:24 Responding p ] 149:10 161:25 Response [3] 44:20 45:8 55:7 Responses (1) 148:6 Responsibil i t ies P) 84:21 203:24 Responsibilify PJ 78:22 230:4 Responsible [2)82:11 137:9 Responsive [3)222:10 222:15 222:17 Rest [5) 34:7 50:9 95:2 165:13 177:25 Result [9)44:21 76:4 132:21133.8 147:22 i63:0 189:25 202:6 212:14 Results [4)41:2 66:7129:15203:1 Resume [1] 27:2 Retaining [1] 46:22 Retreat

1)39:7 41:12 41:13 42:20 170:15 70:16

Retreating (1)43:19 Retroflts (1) 166:17 Retrofltt ing [1)136:20 Return P) 166:13 156:16 235:20 Returned (1)141:24 Returning [2)174:1174:9 Reuse [1] 152:20 Reveals 1) 68:25 Revslle [1)12:4 Revsnue [8] 93:16 102:32 134:12 166:11 166: ^2179:20 196:19 217:23 Revenues [91 99:11 112:24 196:18 210:23 218: 2 218:6 218:7 218:9 218:13 Reverse

ft ] 183:7 tevlew

[6] 9:3 10:11 190:13 202:21 230:18 Reviewed (2)170:1 230:8 Revised [2] 32:16 202:9 Revolving [2)176:19176:21 Reward [2)84:1184:16

IECO IRP Technical Session; 6/f Rezachek

2:15 114:14 115:10 115:12 169:7 71:12 172:1

RGGI (2121:7 21:12

[1112:21 Richard

G l d " "

p i 141:9 151:7 Ridge [1] 08:15 Rightfully [11179:15 Rigorous (1) 222:21 Rio (1) 14:7 Riparian [1160:12 Ripples [3)75:19 75:23 76:2 Rise [59] 16:24 17:2 18:13 38:17 39:5 39: 10 39:13 39:17 39:23 39:25 40:1 40: 6 40:6 40:8 40:13 40:16 40:19 40:25 41:4 43:2 43:6 43:7 43:9 44:2 44:3 44:4 44:7 44:10 44:13 45:1 45:9 45: 11 45:17 45:17 46:15 47:10 46:10 48: 10 48:20 51:1 52:6 52:17 52:20 56: 18 56:19 57:6 57:14 57:15 57:21 57: 24 58:7 68:9 59:10 69:14 69:18 60: 22 63:7 106:16159:19 Risen [1116:14 Rises [61 39:21 45:4 45:15 47:8 59:23 63:12 Rising m 9:12 14:23 16:13 52.7 64:16 113: 2183:17 Risk [3172:17 229:11 229:23 Risk-takIng (1)229:11 Road [6] 46:23 87:19 87:21 121:16 126:14 137:7 Robbie (21) 2:10 5:12 5:16 67:25 74:11 78: 10 78:12 70:15 06:23 95:14 101:11 102:10 104:2 105:6 106:19 108:25 110:2 111:16 112:19 113:14 231:16 Robbie's [2)6:5 87:15 Rocket [1) 180:7 Rocky

R ] 179:16 oger

[1] T2:4 Role [16] 2:23 78:20 156:11 193:7 198:7 199:2 199:9 199:16 199:17 200:10 201:14 203:12 203:16 203:17 203:21 204:21 213:8 227:15 Roles [2)27:16199:6 Roll P) 74:5 230:22 230:23 Rolling [1)22:11 Roof

W 81:11107:13151:10151:10151: 180:19184:14

Roofing [1] 107:12 Roofs [21105:9 141:25 Rooftops [1] 212:i Room p7) 32:4 55:24 67:11 67:16 82:23 83: 1 63:2 66:2 66:20 88:5 88:6 107:18 136:5 138:1 143:2 143:7 143:9 143: 17 144:3 159:13 159:22 168:13 168:

20168:25 169:18 177:5 185:11 Rooms [2)72:19143:11 Root [2)173:15180:23 Roper [1] 149:13 Rostock [1)61:15 Roughly [1] 210:16 Roumasset [10] 2:13 67:1 68:2 90:15 90:22 90: ^4 100:16 100:21 103:2111:20 Round [8] 113:16 113:17 187:15 187:15 194 19195:17 219:13 232:5 Route [1] 97:10 Routine (1) 138:8 Row [1)91:2 Royal

[3)109:22123:24 204:7 Rule [81 89:3 168:25 180:19 160:20 184: 13184:16191:3 203:5 Rulewnaklng P) 89:3 191:3 Rules [5] 65:16 91:25 189:24 190:1 192:3 Rumor

t1)178:3 tun

[3] 4:16 47:6 201:2 Run-up [1)47:6 Runaway [1)11:13 Running [2)168:6165:7 Runs [2] 76:0 96:2 Runway [1] 69:22 Rush [1)141:16 Russell [1] 70:9

59,

sacrif ice p ] 138:16 139:20 173:13 Saddles [11221:4 Sagan [1)77:22 Sakamoto [2] 62:6 88:20 Sales M) 04:23 Salient [2)153:7163:14 Saline (3)20:13 20:21162.14 Salinify [3] 80:1 60:2 60:8 Salt [8] 59:20 59:23 60:5 104:17 145:10 145:11 145:13 145:14 Saltwater [3)46:5169:3169:3 San J2) 16:13 210:5 Sanctioned [1] 3:16 Sand [6) 48:2 48:6 48:6 49:15 161:4 161:14 Sandy P) 48:22 48:23 Sat (1) 206:7 Satellite [2)54:10 54:25

137:17 142:

Satellites [2)30:15 54:19 Saudi [1)51:26 Saunders [10)2:18114:20137:13 _. 7 176:6 176:11 176:15 177:17 177:25 Save I [11] 125:22 129:21 136:11 139:24 144:16 157:2 166:23 168:14 177:6 178:24179:17 Saved [1] 128:13 Saves (3)144:6151.17 179:23 Saving p) 97:14 158:18 158:18 Savings [8] 95:2 95:12 107:11 132:24 135:12 136:10 176:18179:1 I

[7] 57:8 82:12 88:14 114:11 134:2 142:7 172:4 Sayers [1] 13:23 Scale [16] 35:16 52:22 119:13 119:14 121: 11 122:23 123:2 125:16 126:6 126:8 126:9 171:15 171:17 212:11 212:12 212:12 Scales [1)18:15 Scandal [1] 164:21 Scandinavian [1] 172:25 Scenario [6] 17:0 49:2 49:4 50:18 71:8 76:22 Scenarios [10)17:4 17:13 17:1317:1543:1345: 10 46:25 47:10 56:25 57:3 68:0 72: 17 76:21 77:16 77:21192:23 195:12 195:13 Scene j l ] 40:10 Schedule [1] 99:17 Scheme [3] 23:5 24:25 112:21 Schemes [2)24:3 112:22 School [13] 38:3 38:4 59:8 63:22 72:22 72: 23 88:5 108:21152:9 159:4 185:21 185:22186:24 Schools (3)83:17180:14 180:16 Science (18) 10:11 13:5 13:7 28:24 31:14 36: 20 40:7 41:2 44:16 63:14 20 61:20 62:2 69:10 91:5 9 Sciences [5)38:4 69:9 63:22159:5 Scientiflc (1)41:25 Sclentiflcally (1) 221:25 Scientist [5] 10:22 11:25 20:22 153:2 180:0 Scientists | [5] 13:24 61:13 64:1 85:25 169:15 Scope P) 139:6 197:19 197:22 Scores P) 142:25 180:16 Scratched [1)191:12 Screen j l ] 176:25 Screening [1] 182:14 Scripps [1] 12:4 Script M] 26:26 Scrubbers [1] 206:17

54:23 58: 170:25186:

169:18

• b CO IRP Technical Session; 6/8/ [3)123:3123:4185:2 Selected [1] 190:7 Self [1)218:2 Self-promoting [1] 218:2 Self-reliant (I) 70:23 Sell [ I I ] 24:12 24:13 73:11 161:10 179: 24 208:21 211:22 214:2 228:14 228: 14 229:4 Selling (5) 70:21 157:2 207:9 212:2 212:4 Semi [1] 179:22 Semi-trucks rt] 179:22 Seminal [1)12:3 Seminars (1)213:10 Senate [1] 13:1 Senator (9) 6:10 13:1 62:8 82:9 67:20 78:8 86: 19 60:20 88:20 Senators [1] 67:21 Send (2)84:25102:8 Sending [2)104:15104:16 Senior [2)72:9185:14 Sense p ] 25:15 94:21 108:14 108:14120: 21121:22157:24 211:2 211:5 Senses M) 170:20 Sent H] 178:16 Sentence [1] 64:9 Sentiments M] 90:14 Separate [6] 109:19 181:23 195:18 196:10 208: 16 228:16 September [1] 98:4 Sequences (1) 148:12 Sequester P) 94:12 104:11 Sequestered [2)31:20162:18 Sequestration [12] 20:12 86:1 94:9 104:3 104:13 104:14 113:3 157:15 162:11 202:14 206:16 209:24 Series [2)110:24 217:7 Serious (2) 9:6 147:2 Seriously [2)20:19 27:13 Served J2) 99:22 168:11 Serves (1) 103:21 Service m 60:1 195:3 Session [16] 1:9 6:12 6:16 38:14 50:14 90:25 100:3 114:4 168:4 199:21 219:19 221:17 222:2 235:4 235:9 Sessions [1] 4:25 Set [19] 22:14 30:12 32:11 42:7 42:12 51: 10 90:4 92:17 92:19 101:8 109:7 109: 13 109:23 120:9 185:1 195:9 195:10 215:16 222:18 Setback [1)171:2 Setbacks

[1)170:23 Sets (4143:10 92:23 189:11 189:14 Setting [2)12:8 12:7 Settied [1] 39:14 Setup [1)47:5 Seven (5) 16:14 98:14 119:17 133:5 152:16 Seventeen [1] 178:10 Seventies [1] 172:22 Several (16) 7:20 7:20 8:0 8:7 27:16 33:3 34: 18 45:12 46:6 47:3 64:6 66:23 166:7 200:7 201:13 203:25 Sewage [1] 48:6 Sexy (1)186:22 Shade [1)161:25 Shale [2)160:19160:21 Shall [1] 196:2 Shame [11231:25 shanah (13) 2:18 114:19 137:12 137:14 137: 17 143:14 146:11 174:14 176:8 176: 5180:14183:5183:6 Shape [1) 150.1 Share [1)36:1 Shared [2)73:14 229:16 Shareholders [11 227:25 sharing [11 229:10 shaved j l i 141:18 sheet [16] 16:25 18:18 38:24 38:25 39:2 41 13 41:21 41:23 42:5 42:16 42:10 43: 24 67:10 57:11 67:22 68:2 Sheets [12] 5:5 26:2 40:2 44:5 50:4 57:12 57 12 58:10 58:22 99:21 168:0 220:19 Shelf [2)143:4171:19 Shell [1] 160:11 Shied [1] 72:15 Shift (5) 61:14 72:25 74:6 157:22 158:19 shif t ing [2)73:9196:22 Shifts [2)52:19 229:11 Shimon [1] 72:9 Shine [1) 8:24 Ship [4)33:11 56:13124:22 125:4 shipped [3] 133:14 176:5 178:15 Shipping [3)124:19 140:9179:1 Ships

m" [1] 186:25 shook [1)150:10 Shoot [1] 122:18 Shooting

(1) 92:16 shop (1)67:13 Shore [3)59:19 107:2 123:19 Shoreline p ] 47:9 48:21 170:G Shorelines (3] 2:7 38:7 38:9 Short [8] 31:11 42:12 57:8 87:11 156:4 165: 7166:10 192:5 Shorter (1) 214:19 Shorthand [2)234:9 234:18 Shot [1] 105:21 Show [20] 13:19 15:8 16:516:20 32:21 40: 7 66:23 67:15 67:17 62:13 96:4 116: 1 116:21 121:17 124:18 131:16 153: 21 176:17 177:8 209:1 Showed [9] 50:23 53:9 69:6 86:16 119:12 122: 21149:13180:14200:19 Showing (8) 13:13 16:16 41:10 60:8 67:11 67: 16156:12213:5 Shown [S) 42:6 119:10 176:24 180:16 202:8 shows [20111:16 15:17 15:1715:21 16:7 16: 17 17:10 32:13 33:4 33:25 116:2 118: 23 110:24 120:6 120:10 121:11 121: 15 122:5149:17 212:7 Sic [1] 230:3 Sfde [27] 31:12 32:6 41:15 50:5 50:5 107: 4 108:20 109:11 109:12 119:14 129: 13 131:19 136:4 135:5 138:9 142:14 142:15 167:14 159:22 179:24 185:10 190:9 206:22 206:23 208:1 215:7 228:15 Side'bar [1] 62:3 Sided [1] 235:19 Sides [11168:9 Sierra [7] 2:19 114:24 146:14 146:19 173: 15173:20 180:2 Sig [I ] 235:23 Sight ra 54:17 143:5 148:15 155:5 197:25

m 81:8 81 HO 96:23 97:4 97:6 219:23 Signature [21219:24 235:23 Signed p i 30:11 189:8 5 lg ned: Ml 236:23 Signiflcance [21129:4134:2 Signiflcant (16) 13:14 17:1 17:16 18:22 35:13 41: 2 42:3 82:25 73:17 101:23 107:11 130:23 131:25 135:7 167:9 222:9 Signiflcantiy [8] 16:9 16:23 18:19 31:3 33:15 52: 2162:15131:21 Signing [1]81:7 Silver [2)19:17135:1 Similar [ I I ] 40:18 108:18 119:9 121:11 127: 17 176:14 204:17 208:5 209:20 210: 12 216:11 Similarities [1] 191:6 similarly (8) 94:8 136:23 149:20 150:2 151:10 179:24 193:24195:11

[82] 9:13 16:24 17:1 18:7 18:8 18:13 18:18 38:17 39:6 39:10 39:12 39:21 39:22 39:25 40:1 40:5 40:5 40:13 40: 16 40:22 40:25 41:1 43:2 43:5 43:7 43:9 43:12 43:15 43:18 43:21 43:23 43:25 44:2 44:2 44:4 44:7 44:8 44:9 44:13 44:17 44:20 44:22 45:1 45:5 45:9 45:11 45:15 45:17 46:1246:15 46:19 47:1 47:4 47:5 47:10 47:18 48: 10 48:20 52:6 62:7 52:17 52:20 58: 18 S6:19 56:21 66:24 57:6 67:13 57: 14 67:23 58:6 68:9 69:10 59:22 60: 22 63:6 63:12 113:2 116:23 118:13 171:8 185:4 Search W) 217:15 217:17 217:18 217:20 Seas (1) 75:8 Season (1) 12:14 Seasonalify [1] 217:1 Seat [2)186:3193:20 Seattie (8) 207:10 207:10 207:20 207:21 208: 1 208:10 Seawater [17] 65:3 65:6 65:14 77:9 81:4 107:6 116:14 115:16 122:8 123:10 123:12 124:14 125:21 127:7 169:4 169:6 169:7 Second P4) 4:11 8:4 9:3 23:5 26:11 43:17 46: 9 47:21 48:18 54:11 62:7 71:8 76:7 77:11 97:17 105:24 133:25 135:15 148:7 153:8 163:20 163:21171:24 223:5 Secondly p ) 81:15 147:14 Seconds [2)63:21141:12 Section [6] 51:16 74:21140:4 141:4 190:10 192:3 Sections [I ] 68:23 Sector (14) 0:23 32:19 33:4 35:15 62:11 62: 11 69:25 09:21 129:11 190:19 192:2 192:10192:16192:18 Sectors [ I I ) 5:24 24:18 28:16 29:10 31:17 35: 6 62:10 62:19 190:16 192:14 192:19 Security [2] 21:1 64:23 See [105] 4:9 9:4 11:3 12:9 14:22 14:24 17:1 17:6 17:13 17:16 17:24 18:1 18: 12 20:20 27:4 27:0 28:9 29:25 31:17 32:6 32:10 41:19 42:0 42:20 43:2 43: 6 46:13 47:19 66:24 67:17 70:19 70: 20 80:8 60:0 80:13 89:2 89:19 99:12 101:22 113:9 113:12 115:15 115:20 116:6 116:9 119:6 119:13 119:21 120:3 120:18 120:23 121:4 121:12 123:8 123:23 124:4 128:20 128:23 129:6 129:9 130:14 131:20 131:21 132:24 134:20 139:4 139:4 139:5 139:24 140:16 146:22 150:14 153:22 154:21 166:25 169:19 165:24 170:9 171:12 173:6 176:8 176:25 177:2 177:23 178:14 163:21 184:18 185:11 198:10 202:17 204:14 204:17 205:13 212:10 213:3 213:3 215:23 216:6 218:12 217:11 221:21 225:19 230:3 232:6 232:21 Seed M] 165:1 Seeing

g) 160:11 157:1 173:7105:6 eem

[8] 44:3 44:6 98:14 151:24 176:2 182: 8 190:3 329:9 Segment [2)74:21 129:17 Segue 1) 63:21 ^ elect

^

SIMple [61136:5 136:7 141:3 160:21 215:11 Slmpllclfy [1] 138:10 Simpfy (1619:910:2511:6 20:12 25:17 51:4 62:2 65:16 72:1 82:3 82:13 131:1 162:19 163:6 165:9 195:7 214:9 221: 4 230:6 Sincere [2)10:2010:21 Sinclair f l ) 69:16 Single (51 83:2 90:4 107:15 107:16 121:25 Single-family (11107:16 Single-handedly (1) 34:23 Singling

rai 100:8 100:13 112:13 Sinks rq 23:2 23:2 173:25 174:8 174:23

p] 87:3 77:24 193:20

p ] 130:15 170:2 Sites [1] 217:9

Its rl) 45:18

itting 1)4:20 01:1188:6

Situation [12] 63:12 63:13 64:16 64:16 120:20 126:19 i :

# . ECO IRP Technical Session; 6/1 55:24 57:2161:25171:13 Slight [1)115:15 Sllghtfy P) 32:16 40:23 Slope

S 23:8 128:7 143:14 174:21 205:22 S:23 226:25

Slowing [1] 14:23 Slowly [2)114:7 176:5 Small (16) 09:5 09:5 93:18 93:19 109:17 116:21 118:9 121:11 126:17 156:4 156:20 157:20 167:24 179:21 183:14 184:15 Smaller [2)41:3 122:24 Smart [3)70:25 64:14 84:17 Smarter [1] 148:1 Smartest [1] 89:3 Smil ing [1] 174:21 Smit i i I I ) 98:21 Smokestacks [1] 197:10 Smoking [ j ] 187:8 Smooth [1] 44:22 Smorgasbord [1) 139:17 Snack 11) 67:13 Sneaking [2)162:16 219:13 Snow P) 9:12 42:17 So-called [1] 90:5 Social [6] 103:14 112:25 153:2 155:11 176: 10175:15 Societal [1] 64:20 Societally [1] 24:23 Sociefy [121 4:1 10:15 58:7 73:1 73:6 73:14 76:23 99:1 99:4 128:18 140:5 203:5 Soda 111156:21 SOEST [Z] 68:15 64:1 Soft [1] 68:8 Soil (7) 73:19 74:23 100:12 112:10 112: 10112:11 112:13 Solar [37] 10:25 15:17 15:18 15:20 15:24 71:8 81:11 95:3 95:6 105:9 107:12 107:13 109:4 116:24 117:9 117:11 117:12 117:13 117:16 117:19 118:13 118:14 122:7 123:14 125:14 127:5 127:8 135:7 141:25 143:13 168:20 184:14 207:17 210:22 215:24 216:11 226:23 Sold

gl 24:4 33:8 106:7 216:6 olely

(1) 230:5 Sol id (7) 116:21 122:9 123:10 126:12 151: 24 155:25 221:25 Solut ion [5] 165:5 157:5 161:12 163:6 163:25 Solut ions [10) 70:12 137:9 148:16 154:11 157: 2 163:13 171:22 173:13 186:11 196: 23

solve [6] 9:22 9:24 70:13 100:19 100:20 101:18 Solved [11109:21 Someone [9] 67:14 94:11 106:12 147:21 160: 25 155:9 180:12 186:24 220:17 Sometime P l 36:4121:5121:12 Sometimes [6] 85:19 101:4 132:14 133:15 197:4 208:15 Somewhat (61 8:23 164:12 217:16 218:1 218:1 216:12 Somewhere [71122:22 161:4 162:12 162:16 162: 17174:20180:21 Son (3)186:3186:5 187:7 Soon m 6:4 53:25 153:5 156:2 163:11 179 25180:17 Sooner (1)171:23 Sophomore [2)185:22185:23 Sorry [6] 37:14 59:9 139:10 146:11 175:13 205:21 Sort P31 26:16 31:7 41:8 47:20 49:6 82: 17 71:10 89:10 114:22 117:2 140:5 147:13 149:23 150:11 153:19 163:17 173:10 162:16 183:19 180:25 223:1 232:2 232:15 Sorts [3)149:11150:12157:14 Souls [1] 183:25 Sounded [2] 87:16 147:7 Sounds [4] 64:12 101:19 112:7 196:3 Source (131 45:22 62:10 75:7 100:13 112:13 116:25 124:12 124:15 126:1171:11 171:25172:3172:14 Sources (21) 23:1 35:18 44:10 62:12 75:11 79: 6 92:20 93:18 93:17 93:20 93:22 93: 23 96:16 100:17 106:22 110:19 111: 18111:22167:7172:2172:15 Sourcing [1] 22:25 South [4)47:3 52:12 69:18 163:7 Southeast [1] 16:10 Southem (3) 16:9 96:7 218'.4 Southwest (1) 52:13 Space [4] 11:2 11:5 167:24 169:1 Spain p ] 144:14 212:16 216:10 Spanish [11216:14 Spanning [1)201:5 Spatial [ i f 117:7 Speaker [141 4:26 5:9 7:19 8:4 26:11 36:1 56: 18 78:10 90:15 127:22 137:12 146: 13169:2186:13 Speakers (1814:17 7:3 7:16 26:4 69:3 68:5 69: 19 113:19 113:21 114:4 114:5 114: 14 115:23 187:22 168:4 203:1 231: 21 231:24 Speaking m 144:4 161:22 200:3 205:23 211:3

Speaks (1) 20:5

gJ

33:0151:23178:23179:4 229:18 231:23 Situations

[14] 9:16 69:4 79:24 110:17 133:6 130:1 139:2 139:2 139:3 139:4 139:4 139:5139:6139:14 Six-pack [2)139:1 139:2 Sixt i i [3)85:18 88:4 Sixties 1) 103:18 fefxfy 11148:19 ^Jxfy-two

'61120:11 130:18171:16171:20 210: 12210:14 Sized (1) 81:5 Skepticism 1)60:10 ^klll p ] 70:7 88:17 Skil l ful (2) 79:9 83:25 Skil ls

%r 11166:8 3 lam [11166:21 Slamming [1)21.11 blash :i] 112:20 ^feep [IJ 35:11 ^llde -28] 9:8 9:8 9:19 11:24 12:25 13:16 13:24 16:2 17:9 18:4 21:5 25:6 28:9 30:1 30:23 32:5 32.6 43:16 44:11 53: 9 73:15 76:15 128:18 202:7 208:25 210:0 Slide's [1J 32:3 kl ldes [10) 16:4 16:6 26:5 26:0 32:1 50:23

Special [2)72:8 134:12 Species [2)181:23 182:2 Specific [11] 54:12 62:21 129:8 191:22 192:1 194:16 195:24 195:25 224:19 228:25 231:22 Speciflcally P l 58:16 78:20 200:12 Specifications (4194:25195:1 Speclfled [1] 195:7 Specify [ i f 223:16 Spectacular (1)106:10 Spectroscopist [2)10:2310:23 Spectrum P) 11:2 160:1 Speech [2)62:3 87:15 Speed [1] 79:20 Speeds [2)83:4 83:6 Speedy [ i f 79:9 Spend [4117:19 65:7 85:8 180:4 Spending [2f 105:20 137:4 Spent [3)85:4 164:14 174:24 Spew (l) 74:14 Spil ls [1] 61:14 Spin [1)191:15 Spliced [1)182:20 Spokes [ i f 71:11 Sponsored [ i f 182:5 Sponsoring [2f 6:11 38:14 Spot P) 147:7 147:9 167:22 Spring [4] 145:10 145:11 145:13 145:14 Square

65.24144.8144:7 ?i' [1] 234:1 Stab [2)226:6 228:10 Stablllfy m 225:4 225:10 Stabilize p ] 18:15 19:11 56:11 Stack Pl 104:23 162:12 Staff p ] 35:2 37:25 220:24 Stage ra 00:23 117:23 118:5 118:8 122:17 Stakeholders p) 27:14 200:7 203:20 Stale [1] 160:10 Stand ra 90:10 186:13 213:23 215:5 216:21 Standard I [7] 22:21 30:25 31:0 123:24 214:25 316:12 215:17 Standardization [1)214:21 standardized (2)214:17 215:10 Standardizing m 215:18 Standards (2)94:20 215:16

standing [7] 45:25 46:1 46:8 48:8 61:18 63:8 184:6 Standpoint [3)108:23 211:12 214:7 Stands (1) 214:4 Star gl 135:22 135:26

tart P4] 10:6 14:21 14:21 10:20 37:21 53: 8 61:16 63:24 68:18 88:19 91:20 107: 19 113:9 139:6 140:2 141:14 142:13 163:16 190:5 194:5 203:8 212:13 219.9 213:12 Started [10] 3:5 0:1 12:10 68:17 67:13 113: 25130:14147:5167:8179:25 Starting (5] 4:5 141:16 163:20 186:16 190:4 Starts (3)6:8133:24 187:13 Starving (1) 164:23 State [83] 1:16 2:5 2:23 5:25 6:8 20:16 24: 2 26:21 27:16 27:19 27:20 27:21 20: 1 29:15 36:9 36:18 37:1 47:14 48:25 53:13 63:14 60:10 60:13 60:21 63:23 63:25 64:5 77:2 77.7 77:10 82:3 83: 10 104:7 105:24 107:13 109:20 111: 10 115:19 118:18 117:9 127:6 133: 26 133:25 134:5 134:14 134:24 135: 9 158:2 163:7 168:17 169:9 175:21 100:17 102:7 196:3 196:8 198:7 199: 2 199:4 199:4 199:8 199:17 199:25 200:6 200:14 200:16 200:16 201:18 202:2 202:11 203:7 203:20 204:2 208:22 220:18 223:18 220:2 229:3 234:1 234:6 234:10 235:5 235:11 State's [8] 35:21 62:4 102:10 200:17 201:19 202:9 204:20 204:21 Statement p) 61:7 88:24 80:24 States 25) 13:3 16:10 20:7 21:6 21:8 21:18 . 4:19 29:20 36:25 61:3 70:5 73:23 01:19 104:16 107:13 163:24 167:12 182:16 182:17 201:9 201:13 211:17 227:23 228:19 229:1 Statewide [6] 5:21 29:17 29:18 30:16 190:25 192:8 Station

g:) 169:23 169:23 tationary

[1] 33:3 Statistical p ] 36:6 41:25 Statistician [1] 35:1 Stats [1] 142:8 Status

1)115:21 117:21118:4 statute [4] 116:4 191:12 202:17 222:22 Statutes [4)199:4 199:16 202:9 203:9 Statutory [1)199:17 Stay [10] 4:17 28:8 67:17 71:19 85:16 97: 25 102:14 105:20114:9163:22 Staying [1] 219:14 Stays [3)11:6 84:24 145:14 Stead (2)6:13 6:18 Steam [2)139:22106:16 Stefan [1)44:16 Stem (1) 130:24 Step (13) 6:0 8:25 30:19 89:5 109:24 133:

ECO IRP Technical Session; 6/8 22135:2174:4163:14186:10194: 14 213:7 215:17 Step-by-step [1] 183:24 Steps M] 29:4 77:17 134:25 214:18 Steric [2)40:5 44:5 Steve [4] 34:21 37:24 186:2 186:5 Stick (2) 26:5 28:25 Stil l [30)17:13 23:24 27:11 32:1 35:16 36: 1541:1 41:14 42:13 42:17 47:7 49:1 49:8 52:3 63:13 56:14 97:22 107:11 107:15 130:4 152:22 153:15 156:9 158:5 167:4 179:4 191:25 192:4 206: 2 229:1 Stocked (1)133:18 Stockholders [1] 75:21 Stone 13)109:8 109.13109.24 Stood

gl] 145:24 145:24 147:5 147:12 topped

g l 66:7 56:20 topping

Storage [6] 20:12 20:20 43:19 80:18 224:1 Store (51 73:10 75:19 75:22132.12 161:16 Stores [1] 63:8 Storm [5] 46:3 46:5 46:6 150:5 150:9 Story ra)88:l 96:12180:10 Straight p ] 119:21 179:8 Straightforward H) 28:21 Strategic p ] 27:20 27:25 201:7 Strategies [12] 2:15 4:12 29:19 36:5 81:17 87: 18 114:2 115:8 154:25 155:17 166:3 106:21 Strategy [5] 36:2 79:18 82:7 91:24 106:1 Stratosphere [2) 55:17 55:17 Stray [1)144:18 Stream p i 49:15 63:15 80:10 Streamline [11214:16 Streamlining [1] 138:19 Streams (21 63:4 72:17 Street [11 235:2 Strengths [11201:24 Stress [1] 223:20 Stretch [2] 99:19 188:3 Strictly [1] 229:23 String [1] 149:23 Strings [1] 68:22 Strip [3)161:16162:12163:4 Strong [4) 83:21 108:22 147:13 173:16 Stronger y i 150:6 Strongest [2)63:20108:20

• [1)226:16 Suggestions

Suggests [2)40:14 83:6 Suite [1] 235:2 Sulfur [4)23:7 23:10 23:12 101:7 Summarize (4)158:4 205:7 206:4 206:12 Summary [3)28:11 202:16 218:18 Summer (1) 98:6 Summertime [1)12:16 Summit [1] 14:8 Sums [1] 85:1 Sun [3)11:12 210:4 214:6 Sunlight [2)143:16 143:18 Sunny [2)117:12151:19 Sunshine [1] 98:6 Supervision [1)234:11 Supplied [1] 167:11 Supplies j l ] 70:6

69:14 190:9 202:15 Support [14] 14:8 27:16 34:16 102:20 103:24 105:2 139:13 145:19 185:4 199:6 206:19 218:19 216:21 218:22 Supported [1] 70:25 Supporters [1)34:18 Support ing [I ] 146:7 Supportive [2)81:7 201:18 Suppose [2)93:5 103:4 Supposed

gi 6:12 43:14 98:24 228:10 urtace

( I I ) 12:12 15:10 16:7 18:8 43:3 43:5 43:5 43:14 44:6 59:15 59:17 Suries (20) 2:4 5:1 7:19 8:20 8:22 50:21 51: 16 53:5 55:8 55:13 56:21 57:16 61:1 64:17 65:0 65:25 76:8 167:25 168:8 225:19 Surplus [2] 98:6 98:8 Surprise (1) 152:3 Surprising j l ) 10:11 Surrounding (1) 178:20 Survive [1] 102:3 Survived [1] 78:3 Suspend (1) 138:17 Suspended (1) 197:5 Sustain p ) 87:18 88:16 89:14 Sustainabilify [6] 137:13 138:18 139:1 157:14 166: 20 186:22 Sustainable (9) 2:18 25:19 114:20 137:17 138:18 152:11 176:6 176:22177:17 SUV

strongly [1)102:16 StiTJck (1) 150:9 Structural [2] 179:9 180:6 Structure m 29:13 84:15 85:14 101:22 104:7 177:15 203:23 Structured (1) 102:11 Structures [1)65:15 Struggle [4] 82:2 102:9 211:13 214:14 Struggling [1] 102:3 Stuck (3) 88:11 90:12 187:21 Student [4)183:11183:16184:5186:14 Students (6] 88:1 88:3 108:21 142:24 164:17 186:18 Studies (3)81:19136:11 136:17 Study [5] 152:19 177:16 195:18 196:16 229: 19 Studying [2] 54:12 64:6 Stuff (5) 20:23 127:2 178:15 182:23 206:10 Stupid [1)161:15 Sfyle [1] 140:11 Subject [4)89:15102:20146:23 147:2 Submit [1] 232:25 Subsequent [1] 182:10 Subsidies [2] 121:9 122:14 Subsidize [1] 157:14 Subsidized (1) 122:14 Subsidy (1) 73:21 Substantial [4)80:7 119:23160:24 190:20 Substitute [2] 80:2 107:9 Substitutes (1) 160:9 Substitution (1)81:3 Subtropical [1] 182:17 Subtropics [2)17:2118:21 Succeeds (1) 187:5 Successful [1)184:11 Successfully [1] 29:20 Sucked [1)12:14 Suction (2)142:17 169:10 Sudden (1)150:19 Sufflclent [2)121:9 123:17 sugar [3)60:17 74:23164:6 Suggest [2] 4:23 227:6 Suqaes — j g e s t e d [5)81:19162:24 168:12 222:7 222:12 Suggesting ra 178:17 193:7 214:21 215:15 218:

Suggestion

[81 '96:25 160:12 160:16 161:22 169:

• <

: : TOTT

ECO IRP Technical Session; 6/ Targets [1)195:6 Tariff (11) 206:21 211:20 211:21 212:1 212: 6 212:8 212:9 212:14 212:17 212:18 212:21 Task [23] 38:16 79:2 79:20 60:24 84:21 69; 2 91:22 91:24 92:6 94:17 99:12 169: 20191:1 192:12192:20193:1 193:9 193:10 195:20 206:3 206:6 224:21 224:24 Tax p9] 24:16 24:22 24:22 75:14 75:15 86:2 92:15 92:18 103:10 103:20 105: 19 105:22106:10 120:22 133:25 134: 4 135:9 135:9 157:6 157:11 157:20 158:19 166:12 166:21 166:23 214:10 214:11 214:12 214:14 Taxation (1) 196:18 Taxes [9] 24:20 24:23 24:24 93:15 101:25 106:15112:24196:18196:17 Taxing M] 103:11 Taxpayer P) 74:2 99:11 Taxpayers

?i) 73:21 73:24 03:14 ay lor

M] 68:13 68:16 58:16 63:3 Taylor's r i) 69.8 Teaching [1)167:11 Team p ) 34:16 78:19 Teasing [1)63:12 Tech [2125:13 236:5 Tech/Med/Interpreted [1) 235:6 Technical [4)1:913:12 236:3 236:9 Technically rt] 169:18 Technicians [1)64:1 Technique P ] 95:18 96:21 Technological [1) 109:20 Technologies (38) 3:20 19:10 22:18 24:9 25:15 51: 19 61:5 62:18 65:9115:21 116:2117: 22 117:25 110:5 118:11 119:1 119: 10121:18121:21 121:22121:24 122: 6 123:4123:25124:1124:5124:8 127:10 127:14 132:20 136:12 172:5 172:8 218:22 226:11 226:17 228:19 226:24 Technology [41] 18:24 19:1 10:17 26:10 27:24 38: 6 61:18 57:4 69:9 61:4 61:13 61:20 62:2 63:22 65:11 69:16 97:14 100:10 117:16 117:22 118:2 118:18 118:18 118:20 119:18 119:19 119:20 120:13 120:24 122:1 122:3 122:18 123:20 133:7 159:5 164:11 171:10 172:6 181:17183:19 235:14 Technology's r i ] 18:24 Ted (2) 27:21 28:2 Tel [1)235:16 Teleconference M) 37:6 Telephone/Video [1] 235:6 Temperature (10) 11:18 11:19 17:10 17:12 40:13 43:2 43:6 43:10 43:13 43:14 44:24 48:3 45:4 50:22 60:24 62:9 65:6 116: 10 150:3 Temperatures [8] 9:1118:0 18:16 40:23 44:13 50:

19 50:25 51:6 Temporal [2)117:0117:13 Temptation [1] 92:8 Ten [9] 14:18 14:19 88:9 90:10 121:16 122:16 132:12 132:13 156:16 Ten-year-old [2)86:9 90:10 Tend [4)24.24 53:2 53:3 55:18 Tendency [2] 59:23 219:1 Term (21) 69:1 79:16 87:18 121:23 122:6 122:6 122:7 122:15 122:19 122:25 127:13 127:13 127:13 127:15 132:6 153:6 167:3 171:11 177:22 192:5 192:11 Terms (22) 5:5 23:21 51:22 56:1 79:7 79:14 86:13 86:14 110:10 128:20 129:9 129:25 130:9 134:3 134:5 136:14 137:4 161:7 190:14 192:4 204:14 225:25 Terrestrial [1] 66:1 Terrible [3)147:1 160:19 231:25 Terribly (1) 149:16 Terriflc [1] 25:25 Territories [1] 207:25 Territory (1) 207:20 Terry [31] 2:4 5:1 7:19 7:19 7:21 7:22 7:23 6:15 8:16 8:20 25:25 26:10 31:6 38: 15 51:12 51:13 52:5 53:15 55:3 56: 16 56:17 56:10 60:24 62:6 64:13 66: 2 167:23 187:25 188:8 219:6 226:16 Terry's [1] 2i:9 Tssoro [1] 76:24 Test [2] 142:25 160:16 Testimony P) 221:10 222:10 222:24 Texas [2)13:4 49:15 Thanking [ I ] 231:24 Theater (2)144:19144:22 Themselves M) 9:22 60:5 70:20 203:18 Theory (2)100:18101:3 Thereafter 17| 202:7 234:10 Therefore (9) 14:17 24:7 29:23 31:24 65:17 70: 18 83:11 136:15 222:7 Themial ( I I ) 40:6 42:24 44:3 77:9 116:22 116: 24 117:1 117:15 118:13 122:24 123: 14 Thermal's [1] 122:7 They've [11)4:18 15:6 21:20 93:8 134:19 141: 17 145:21 158:22 169:26 160:16 208: 7 Thinking [5] 58:11 74:4 74:6 76:1 174:18 Third (14) 4:12 33:4 69:24 77:8 77:11 82:9 91:2 129:21 137:12 139:13 145:19 147:19176:5178:6 Thoughts (6) 10:16 138:14 191:21 223:4 225:3 225:9 Thousand p) 140:12 140:16 140:17

JVs p ] 126:14 164:24 Sweafy [1)151:6 Swell [1] 47:2 Swiderskl [4)1:24 234:5 234:18 235:12 Swimming [1] 162:9 Switched (1) 12:25 Switchgrass (1) 163:7 Switching [2] 107:30 130:16 Symbols [1)42:19 Sympathy [1] 186:22 Synopsis [115:9 System T48] 60:2 60:17 60:20 79:24 70:25 80; 3 80:4 85:2 05:6 08:3 08:9 98:24 100: 24 101:9 103:4 103:10 106:10 110: 26 111:8 111:8 119:23 120:10 120: 11120:12120:13121:10121:12122: 5 123:12 123:18 124:11 124:13 126: 14 125:16 126:10126:12 127:8 171: 19 195:1 213:14 215:1 215:12 216: 17 216:9 226:23 227:1 227:11 227:11 Systematic [1] 127:11 Systems [24] 52:12 65:12 65:13 75:9 77:12 77: 13 80:17 109:17 121.7 121:7 123.13 123:15 123:16 126:9 127:5 127:6 130:12 130:19 132:4 136:15 136:21 202:11212:2 217:4

TsFIH M] 186:25 T^h l r ta (1)106:24 Table [10)2:1 5:10 32:13 45:18 45:22 45: 23 40:11 85:13111:14 231:15 Tables [1] 76:24 Tacked M] 156:2 Tackle [1] 168:15 Tackled M] 75:6 Tag [2)210:10 211:6

Site Tags P) 206:15 220:4 Tahoe (1) 187:20 Tall p ] 74:15 74:16 187:0 Talent p ] 86:21 85:23 86:9 Talented P) 85:25 86:7 Talks [3)38:15 149:16 205:7 [email protected] H] 235:17 TanUlnger pO) 2:5 2:23 0:4 26:11 26:21 26:24 27:10 37:24 53:20 54:6 62:14 198:5 198:8 190:10 198:19 219:22 219:25 220:2 220:5 220:10 221:5 221:7 221: 10 221:13 223:4 223:8 223:14 225:5 225:12 229:14 Tar p) 161:4 161:11 181:13 Target [6] 93:21 93:25 95:13 95:15 222:16 222:20

Threat M) 69:0 Threats [1] 60:1 Three [40] 30:16 56:19 64:12 75:25 76:21 77:12 77:13 87:25 88:3 93:21 94:16 107:16 120:25 127:18 131:11 131:12 135:22 139:4 139:9 140:3 141:7 144: 7 144:8 146:5 147:4 147:12 147:24 153:3 153:12 155:25 156:4 168:4 181.8 152:5 188.4 217:25 216:12 219:24 219:25 220:6 Three-fer [1)113:13 Three-quarters m 107:16 Threes m 141:9 Thriving [1] 145:8 Throughout [17] 60:12 69:5 69:15 70:5 73:6 73:8 73:22 75:19 75:23 76:3 83:24 118:9 124:17 221:17 222:2 232:4 232:10 Throw I [5] 57:1 95:23 140:5 152:6 152:6 Throw-away [1] 140:5 Throwing (2)179:5193:16 Thrown (11 68:20 Thumb [1] 168:26 Tide (6) 45:12 48:4 46:7 48:23 47:18 Tie [2)211:22 222:19 Tied p i 5:16 60:22 89:7 Timely : i ] 198:3

mlng 1) 56:23 "Iny 1] 91:12

res [1)142:4

(1?'«S?23 To: Hashiro [1] 235:21 Today (59) 4:8 6:1 6:3 6:8 6:11 6:15 6:19 6: 23 7:4 19:15 26:9 27:4 27:5 27:14 34 21 37:18 38:14 36:17 39:17 44:4 65: 4 55:12 58:7 67:10 72:7 86:22 85:23 104:19 105:4 107:10 128:8 128:15 133:23 135:6 130:6 138:23 147:24 148:7 157:9 162:9 170:11172:19 181:17 194:2 200:0 208:11 209:11 212:23 213:24 219:14 231:21 231:24 232:1 232:3 232:10 232:13 232:17 232:23 233:2 j Today's 1 (4)4:216:22 231:14 233:1 Toga [1)180:7 Together (13121:9 21:14 21:19 65:25 91:2 144: 11 146:3 183:21 201:2 214:16 228: 20 226:16 230:25 Tom ri) 100:21 Tomorrow tJ] 204:6 Ton [12] 123:12 127:7 162:5 162:17 162: 21 169:16 169:17 169:18 169:20 178: 26 227:19 227:19 I Tons 1 (141 77:18 125:21 126:2 161:14 161: 18 161:21 162:4 162:6 162:20 163:4 163:8163:19169:16169:19 Took 1

68:10 88:18 126:16 156:6 202:4 07:6 217:19 I

Tool 0


9k 12} 177:3 195:19 Tools p] 158:19 195:19 195:23 Top [15] 8:24 10:5 10:6 10:9 13:23 17:13 25:14 46:7 112:18 112:19 143:6 207: 18 208:19 211:7 217:19 Topic [9] 29:8 60:16 09:12 94:17 116:13 197:3 197:4 206:16 206:25 Topics [2)28:8 206:20 Topographic p) 46:12 48:13 47:16 Total [10] 34:1 41:20 74:0 76:3 100:13 112: 12 124:10 159:19 162:2 163:9 Touch (2)138:10 201:3 Tough [7] 27:11 36:8 38:8 132:11 132:14 198:16 220:10 Tourism [9] 2:6 8:5 26:12 26:21 49:3 60:23 106:19106:11 217:2 Tourists (1) 145.13 Toward Pl 92:18 202:12 Towards P) 6:26 41:9 57:20 83:22 126:15136: 18 143:23 154:10 Town [2)145:3 151:4 Toxic [2)76:13 76:25 Toxics [1)74:14 Track [6] 16:15 15:16 19:19 20:8 44:12 54:8 Tracked M] 38:24 Trade m 23:4 23:7 52:14 69:13 65:2 92:21 103:8 223:24 224:4 Trade*ofrs m 223:24 224:4 Traded M] 24:4 Trader (1) 210:5 Trading

23:5 23:21 24:25 25:3 227:18 226:

CO IRP Technical Session; 6/8i Treat [1] 189:1 Treated [ I ] 195:2 Treatment [1)33:22

P) 6:23 7:3 163:15 Trees ( I I ) 7:1 163:12 163:13 163:17 163: 20 163:23 163:24 173:25 174:7 174: 7 174:23 Tremendous [1)231:20 Trend [10] 15:22 15:23 41:21 41:22 42:2 42: 11 44:22 44:23 44:24 55:13 Trends [2] 14:1 16:6 Trevenna (121 2:18 114:19 137:12 137:17 137: 19 137:23 140:14 143:15 174:17 176: 10183:11 186:13 TRIAL [1] 235:4 Tricky (2)94:13 94:24 Tried [2)6:18180:18 Triggers (1) 57.13 Trill ion [1] 125:25 Tripled (2)156:4156:9 Tripling

(2)141:7 141.10 Trivial [1)61:24 Tropic [1] 17:21 Tropical [1] 63:4 Tropics [1)16:21 Troposphere [1] 16:15 Trouble ;5] 71:12 92:16 174:5 188:21 229:4 "ruck [ I ] 82:19 Trucks (2) 179:21 179:22 True [ I I ] 71:15 79:17 85:9 101:2 159:21 159:22 172:23 174:17 178:12 170:17 214:20 Truly [1] 04:4 Trut i i p ] 88:14 185.12 Truthiness m 69:1 Try [15] 35:3 50:7 56:11 114:9 140.2 162: 19 166:19 167:1 174:12181:16 186: 20 206:4 214:15 221:16 225:21 Trying [19] 15:6 26:16 34:24 61:19 54:23 88: 12 94:20 98:22 102:4 103:22 147:1 155:16 157:22 164:14 193:2 205:25 207:3 223:19 223:20 Turn [17] 8:14 8:14 45:19 45:24 68:11 97: 1 141:12 150:8 152:12 188:15 168: 20 169:1 187:8 187:22 187:23 219:6 231:11 Turnaround [1] 55:21 Turned [1] 235:3 Turning (6) 56:13 73:20 88:2 136:4 168:13 175:1 Turns [4)48:4 94:24 95:5 96:8

P) 120:19 152:4 166:8 Two [50) 17:21 21:6 29:12 29:16 29:19 29 20 29:22 30:19 43:10 44:20 48:24 52; 12 57:11 57:12 57:14 74:17 75:12 75; 13 75:25 79:24 92:14 96:5 106:17 114:1 116:25117:6121:6 129:5139: 10 139:11 142:18 143:6 145:17 146: 6 160:9 160:13 152:5 174:22 184:25 185:13 200:23 201:11 207:11 214:8 214:12 214:13 217:25 222:13 222:14 222:14 Two-fer (11113.13 Two-phase [1)29:12 Tying \\\ 215:1 Tyndall [1)10:23 Type [18136.8 05:12119:9120:1121:18 124:2 124:7 125:16 169:5 169:10 169:14 192:22 195:19 208:6 208:9 221:7 224:20 235:5 Typed (1) 217:10 Types (71102:12 116:19 116:10 116:15 195; 12 225:25 226:23 Typical [3)49:5 118:23120:11 Typically [1)131:14

Unfatriy [1)221:24 Unfortunate [1)54:15 Unfortunately [3)72:10 163:11 220:23 Unfunded [2] 98:22 99:9 Unifled (1)166:16 Uniform [2)143:2144:4 Unintended [1) 99:10 Union [2)21:6 92:12 Unique [7] 19:17 90:8 109:15 109:16 156:11 216:24 231:23 Uniqueness [1] 109:19 Unit [7)77:17 97:17 118:19 125:7 125:9 192:15 195:21 Unite [2)183:25164:18 United [15] 18:10 20:7 21:6 24:19 61:3 70:5 73:23 107:13 163:24 167:12 182:17 183:18 211:17 227:23 229:1 Units [7] 95:20 97:18 98:17 111:1 119:4 119:20125:8 Unlverslfy (10) 3.7 8:11 85:21 89:20 90:17 114: 20 139:20159:3 159:10182:12 Unknown [1] 59:25 Unless P) 120:21 161:15196:5 Unlike [1] 95:5 Unmanaged [1)170:16 Unregulated [2] 93:20 93:23 Unrelated [1] 30:10 Unsmooth [1] 44:25 Unusual [1] 16:21

(119) 5:7 5:16 6:24 7:8 8:22 11:25 12 7 12:11 12:14 13:8 17.10 17:17 26:3 34:24 37:16 38:16 39:3 39:15 42:14 44:9 45:19 46:5 46:5 47:6 50:4 50:6 61:2 51:7 52:14 55:16 57:1 59:16 60: 5 65:5 67:1 70:10 73:24 74:8 76:15 81:1 81:7 81:8 81:10 83:2 63:22 88:9 86:10 90:11 91:25 92:9 94:16 96:23 97:4 97:6 98:8 99:19 107:19 113:11 120:24 129:14 130:4 132:11 132:14 132:18 137:25 138:12 139:22 140:1 140:25 141:14 142:14 144:2 151:22 152:4 152:15 155:7 159:24 160:20 165:23 171:17 178:7 179:14 181:9 183:14 183:17 184:20 185:2 185:2 166:5 166:23 191:19 193:23 198:11 202:10 207:12 207:22 210:25 212:10 213:14 213:15 214:14 215:10 218:12 217:6 217:22 217:23 217:24 216:2 218:3 216:5 210:5 218:8 218;9 219:6 224:15 226:1 226:22 230:23 232:22 Upbeat ri) 147:6

Update (5) 19:22 36:12 69:1 92:4 92:5 Updated [2)32:10 32:12 Updating [1)232:18 Upgrades [ l ) 134:10 Upper [6) 16:1 55:6 55:17 107:4 120:9 121:2 Upstream [2)111:18 230:19 Upward

["} Traffic (1) 83:8 Trains 1)167:4 iralectory

Transcribed ri) 235:22 Transcript 3)234:12 235:10 235:20 Transcripts [1] 232:23 Transit [1] 102:24 Transitory [1)61:23 Transmission [3)95:20 125:5125:17 Transparency '2) 38:16 207:1 i^ransparent [3)95:24 111:7 218:24 Transport [3)33:0 33:15162:13 Transportable 1) 160:0 transportat ion (10) 10:10 24:22 35:15 82:13 82:13 82:24 147:4 164.9 165:4 192:18 Trash [3] 152:5152:21 152:22 Travel

33:1171:11 183:20 184:16 209: e'209:19 209:25

\ '

u TOT [11 30:4 U.N.'s

(10) 4.6 29:13 29:15 30:2 30:3 69:5 128:19129:1 129:1 161:19 U.S.'s [ l j 60:24 ubiquitous [1)23:16 UHERO [2)2:14 90:22 Ultimately [14] 79:5 125:7 158:1 189:22 190:11 191:2 191:4 193:9 202:5 209:15 213: 21 218:21 218:23 232:19 Unable [1)231:15 Unbundle [1] 228:13 Uncertain [2] 70:2 97:7 Uncertainties [1)41:1 Uncertalnfy

Gl 13:20 39:19 58:23 75:5 153:15 nclear

[4) 152:23 153:13 154:11 155:23 Uncomfortable [1] 108:16 Under (24) 23:4 23:7 23:23 24:11 30:4 36: 18 45:16 47:12 49:1 55:16 59:21 69: 22 89:25 71:12 77:7 77:10 84:15 105: 23 163:12 199:16 201:20 203:23 214: 6 234:10 Under-predicting

Underground [1] 20:13 Underlying [1) 184:21 Undersaturated [1] 56:2 Understood p] 44:8 50:22 75:10 Underway [2)21:4 188:10 Unequivocal [1)9:9

[1)41:22 Urge [1)^1:9 Urged [1)81:8 Urgency [1)153:20 Usage [2)129:15136:18 Useful [5] 35:6 99:14 182:17 203:16 219:16 User [3)125:7125:8125:13 User's [1) 110:3 Users

C)126:6 ses

(17) 31:22 33:3 33:21 70:0 77.4 82:1 82:6 83:24 84:4 126:8 125:13 129:9 138:18 140:18 141:19 142:10 160:2 Usual (2) 20:0 130:21 Utensils [1)140:10 Utilities (62) 2:24 3:17 10:9 22:2 24:10 27.7 34:17 60:14 71:2 72:12 105:2 189:6 191:4 191:23 192:6 102:17 193:18 196:10 106:17 109:7 203:17 206:10 206:10 206:2 206:2 206:6 206:13 206:13 207:2 207:3 207:6 207:8 208: 11 210:6 211:13 212:3 212:22 214: 24 216:19 216:14 216:26 217:7 217: 11 217:12 217:14 218:8 218:18 210: I 225:3 226:9 227:4 227:6 227:13 227:23 228:13 228:16 229:13 229:17 230:7 230:15 230:22 232:20 Utilities' [3)203:11 217:9 224:24 Utilify [71] 2:10 3:16 9:22 18:6 28:17 33:1 33:1 33:4 33:6 33:8 62:20 87:25 78: I I 78:14 07:15 97:30 109:10 120:16 121:11 122:20 123:1 123:1 125:16 125:15 126:5 126:8 126:9 190:10 190:21 101:3 102:1 102:10 103:21 103:24 193:24 194:1 194:3 194:8 106:23 196:2 200:6 200:13 200:13 202:22 204:9 206:4 206:22 207:10 207:20 208:12 210:12 210:13 210:20 212:12 212:18 212:20 213:7 213:22 214:2 214:3 214:5 215:2 216:7 216:2 218:2 223:22 226:22 230:10 230:13 231:2 232:8 Util ify-owned (1) 33:6 Utilize [1)128:19 Utilizing (1) 130:21

Vacation p) 34:21 106:13 Valerie [3)1:24 234:8 234:18 Valid (1) 13:13 Valuable P) 79:19 163:1 224:21 Value (6) 39:20 102:7 108:7 108:8 132:4 229:6 Values [1] 42:21 Vapor P) 11:20 11:22 51:5 Variabilify (4)41:20 41:24 57:9 229:24 Variable [5] 06:10 96:14 96:17 98:12 216:5 Variables (1) 63:12 Variance [1) 34:7 Variefy [9) 11.1 21:9 70:24 71.16 105:3 110;

at HOI 1!

ECO IRP Technical Session; 6

c,

I'

16 H O I 127:10 200:24 Various (111 27:16 42:25 97:2 97:3 111:5 115 21 116:1 195:21 199:5 199:6 221:19 Vary (1) 98:13 Vast (2)35:17151:25 Vehicle [6] 33:9 76:14 82:24 157:20 157:22 230:3 Vehicles [3)19:8 63:3 83:7 Velocify [1] 150:4 Veneer [1] 197:5 Venezuela :i) 161:6 'entilation

[2)142:11 142:13 venue P) 193:4 193:6 224:26 Venues [1] 190:25 Venus [2111:1211:12 Verb [1] 229:8 Verbatim r i ) 106:4 Version [1] 222:23 Versus 5)44:2 62:10 110:18 135.16 135:18 'eto

^ ^ ' • • *

MJ 183:21 Videos [11 235:20 videotaping

v iew [8] 41:25 61:18 07:7 98:11 101:21 102:15146:22167:12 Viewed [1] 165:8 Virgin [IJ 163:2 Virginia [1] 175:19 Virtually [1] 171:18 Visible [1) 155:7 Vfsibfy (1)155:14 Visit ID 49:0 Visitation [1] 105:20 Vfsitor [2\ 33:18 105:20 Visitors [IJ 49:11 Visor (1) 143:4 Visual [1] 170:21 Volcanic [6] 15:17 15:19 15:19 15:24 52:15 Volcano [1] 167:20 Volume [1] 235:7 Volumes [11175:23 Voluntary P l 20:6 20:8 208:3 Volunteer [4124:3 30:9 96:24 156:14 Voted :i] 103:19 ulnerable

m

e,

[2] 42:22 48:8

W Wada

[1)48:14 Waikiki [1)48:13 Walt (6) 25:24 36:4 67:2 214:7 223:11 223:

Waiting [3)146:1 169:22170:1 Wake

[2] 179:12 180:6 Wal-Mart P) 179:12 180:5 Wal-Mart's [2)157:2179:14 Walk [3] 141:5 141:8 176:25 Walking [3)72:6196:25 199:20 Walks [1] 82:25 Wall [3] 46:22 143:10 143:12 Wants [7] 6:25 50:18 74:7 137:7 161:22 225: 21235:3 War

[1)235:15 Warm [4140:4 40:17 150:8182:8 Warmer [5111:22 16:23 51:9 150:4 150:5 warmest 111 14:24 Warming [37] 1:10 3:19 3:25 4:3 5:22 6:25 9:9 9:14 15:9 16:8 16:16 17:14 18:13 25: 24 31:1 31:5 31:7 40:3 40:3 43:3 44: 18 54:9 54:12 56:15 69:7 78:19 78: 21 78:24 101:8 101:14 140:19 149: 24 172:13 183:8 197:12 235:4 235:10 Warms Ml 17:17 Warmtii [1116:20 Warren [1)115:13 Wars [11167:23 Washington (1) 148:4 Waste [15)80:10 84:17 99:10 116:21 122: 10 123:10 126:10 126:12151:24 151: 25 162:17 155:25 164:5 164:6 164:11 Waste-to-energy [11126:10 Wastes [11141:18 Wastewater [2)33:22 89:10 Watch [2)184:6 187:2 Watching [1)42:13 Water (52] 11:20 11:22 39:25 40:3 43:19 44: 5 45:16 45:22 45:23 45:25 46:1 46:8 46:14 47:7 48:8 48:10 51:5 51:20 51: 23 52:3 59:16 59:20 60:21 69:22 69: 25 71:12 75:7 75:8 77:24 81:24 85: 13 89:10 95:3 95:6 95:24 97:5 116: 23 117:1 118:13 118:14 125:14 127; 5 127:8 129:12 129:16 135:8 145:23 150:3 150:5 164:4 166:20 176:9 Water-Intensive [1] 61:20 Waters [2] 46:11 150:8

V i m [2)119:15119:16 Watts [2] 144:8 144:6 Wave (9) 47:2 117:2 118:7 118:9 122:15 123:19 145:22 167:10 188:24 Wavelengths [1)11:1 Waves [4146:2147.6 47:5145:24 Ways I [18] 84:10 66:8 93:21 97:2 104:10 110:16 132:3 134:9 134:12 138:17 139:11 146.17 146:6 158:2160.3 164:5193:17 222:24 Wayside [1] 232:2 Weara r i ] 26:13 Weatiier

Tr [11 37:16 Webmaster [1] 53:25 Website (14) 26:7 26:9 53:18 53:23 53:25 54: 3 66:8 68:7 167:19 209:7 209:8 216: 17 232:22 232:23 Websites [1] 217:9 Week p i 54:4 94:21 162:4 Weekend [1)138:9 Weeks PJ 37:6 46:19 152:12 Weenies [1)25:13 Weight pZI 84:16 165:13 Welcome 1115:18 Well-deserved [11 34:21 West ra 42:19 43:24 108:20 110:23 175:19 Westem

Tr [1] 45:20 Wetiand [3)45:19 48:159:17 Wheel p ) 71:10 71:11 215:3 Wheels m 160:7 Whereas [2)117:14 191:3 White (1141:14 Who'd [1] 35:6 Who've (2)67:20138:1 Whole p i ) 3:23 4:8 60:12 87:2 105:3 105: 25 127:10 136:2 143:22 144:1 144:4 165:1 176:3180:1 164:25186:19 186:23 100:23 194:12 107:18 226:21 Wholesaling [1] 103:6 Widespread [3)9:12118:11 119:3 Wife [1] 133:5 Wil (1) 169:24 Will ing [2)9:20110:9 Win (3)144:25144:25144:25 Win-win-win [1) 144:25 Wind [26] 38:3 79:23 79:24 107 1 107:4

• k 107:19106:19109:4113:11 117:3 118:12122:7 123:16 125:16 126:5 126:7 146:24 150:4 207:17 208:18 208:19 216:6 226:21 226:22 226:23 Windfall [1103:9 Windmil l (1) 106:3 WindoM/ [4] 142:14 143:5 143:6 143:13 M n d s [1152:14 Windward [IJ 107:4 Winston [1] 158:21 Wintert ime [2)12:15 12:18 Wipe [1)72:22 Wisely (3)90:10 158:22173:23 Wishing [1] n . 2S w i tness [1] 235:23 Woke m11:25 Woman pn 4:20 67:4 Wonderful 16) 163:16 166:8 167:22 232:2 232:3 Wondering [1] 179:9 Wood [2)163:14 163:16 VVord [2)175:19 224:2 Words [6111:16 63:23 194:26 221:2 228:22

[11186:24 Workable [1) 227:1 Woriters [11197:21 ATorfca [4123:14 137:20 209:1 212:6 •Workshops

[1] 213:10 Worid [26] 16:8 30:21 50:25 73:22 76:6 76: 23 88:1 86:10 86:11 101:16 106:4 112:10 116:9 129:3 138:21 140:6 140:21 157:16 159:15 159:17 159:23 161:24 166:9 187:21 178:6 176:6 Worid's [11183:8 Worid-famous (1) 112:10 Woridwide [31106:16106:16112:13 Worms [2)197:3 107:6 Worried p ]12 : l 56:25173:3 Worse (4)13:22 14:13162:21 152:21 Worst [2)41:4 132:5 Worth [2)20:3141:12 Wow

[21217:6 310:5 Write [3)5:6 50:10 137:22 Writer [2)13:6113:6 Written [2] 180:21 186:23 Wrote [2)87:16 144:11

Year

CO IRP Technical Session; 6/8/ [b2i 12:5 12:812:16 i9:6"31:"4 34:1T 38:20 39:1 39:8 39:11 39:13 39:14 39:17 39:18 39:20 30:22 45:2 47:3 58:20 63:23 72:11 79:1 88:9 88:16 00:10 110:20 120:14 121:4 121:5 125:23126:1 126:23 131:17131:18 134:20 148:21 148:25 160:1 160:11 160:13 160:14 160:25 161:13 161:14 161:17 161:18 161:21 162:4 162:20 163:7 163:10 163:19 163:21 164:14 179:20 189:13 189:22 204:14 211:10 214:12 214:14 222:14

Yearly (1) 19:22

Years pO] 3:25 4:7 7:17 7:24 8:7 8:13 9:16 14:19 14:19 14:20 14:24 14:25 16:7 16:22 16:23 18:19 27:14 28:1 38:5 38:25 39:16 40:16 40:19 40:21 46:18 59:4 54:6 74:13 79:3 79:22 79:25 87: 21 88:4 95:7 111:5 119:23 121:4 121: 16 122:17 136:13 136:2 140:25 149: 2 160:9 150:13 152:17 155:22 155: 25 162:3 163:21 171:10 171:23 171: 23173:4 174:21 176:6180:11 164: 23 184.25 185:19 203:6 204:1 205: 16 214:8 214:12 214:13 215:26 222: 13 222:14 222:15

Years' (2) 9:4 9:6

Yellow [2)210:18 212:7

Yellows [1115:7

Yield (1)161:17

Yoga [1] 145:4

York (2)21:12 22:3

Young [4)4:20 63:10 83:18185:6

Yourself [8)4:23 54:11 138:21 139:15141:4 141:8 146:8162:6

Yourselves [1] 147:20

Youti i P) 83:19 183:6 187:5

Zealand [1] 157:7

Zealots [1] 10:3

Zero [2)11:18 134:11

Zone [1)47:23

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

COPY

HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC.

INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLANNING ADVISORY GROUP

TECHNICAL SESSION

CLIMATE CHANGE/GLOBAL WARMING

FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 2007, COMMENCING AT 8:34 A.M

STATE CAPITOL AUDITORIUM

HONOLULU, HAWAI'I

Reported By: Va le r i e Mariano Swiderski^ Hawai^i CSR 4353

CARNAZZO COURT REPORTING COMPANY, LTD. (808) 532-0222

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

TABLE OF CONTENTS OPENING REMARKS PAGE - M o d e r a t o r , Dr. Mike Hamnett, Research 3

Corporation of UH BACKGROUND ON CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUES ". An Overview of the Greenhouse Gas Issue 8

Dr. Terry Surles, Hawaii Natural Energy Institute

" Hawaii's Greenhouse Gas Inventory 26 Dr. John Tantlinger, State of Hawaii, Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism

- Impact to Hawaii's Shorelines 38 Dr. Chip Fletcher, UH Department of Geology and Geophysics

" Q&A 50 POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR HAWAII ~ An Environmental Perspective 68

Mr. Henry Curtis, Life of the Land ~ A U t i l i t y P e r s p e c t i v e , Mr. Robbie Aim, 78

Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. ~ A Legislative Perspective, Representative 87

Hermina Morita, Chair of the House Committee on Energy and Environmental Protection

" An E c o n o m i c P e r s p e c t i v e , Dr. Jim Roumasset, 90 UH Department of Economics & UHERO

~ Q&A 100 OPTIONS MilD STRATEGIES FOR CONTROLLING GHG EMISSIONS - Renewable Energy, Dr. Dave Rezachek, 115

Hawaii Renewable Energy Association ~ Energy Efficiency 128

Mr. Brian Kealoha, Energy Industries - What Each of Us Can Do 137

Ms. Shanah Trevenna, Sustainable Saunders ~ From Belief to Behavior: Motivating Change 146

Mr. Jeff Mikulina, Sierra Club - Feedstock for the Future 159

Dr. Barry Raleigh, UH ~ Q&A 168 INCORPORATING CLIMATE CHANGE INTO THE IRP PROCESS - How Does the Regulatory Process Work with 188

Greenhouse Gas? Mr. Carl Freedman, Haiku Design and Analysis

- How Does the State Government Play a Role? 198 Dr. John Tantlinger, DBEDT

~ What Kinds of Things Can Ut i l i t i e s be Doing? 205 Mr. Darren Kimura, Energy Industries

" Q&A CLOSING REMARKS Gary H a s h i r o , HECO 231

CARNAZZO COURT REPORTING COMPANY, LTD. (808) 532-022'2

1

r -

^

-

.''

r

v~

!_..

_

'.'•:

~-

.-

_-

__ ' - ' • :

—

; •

'-} f

--

V-

-^ ^

i^ r

PAGE LINE LAWYER»S NOTES

m

1

-

'. '

• ;

- •

. ^ • ^

f

• *

\ I

~

-.-':

_.;_

^

' .I

}

H

s .-

^ • \

I .

^

t 3

PAGE LINE

•

LAWYER'S NOTES

•

1 1

1 1

1

1

1 1 1 1 •

1 1

1 1

1

1 1 1 1

1

1 1 1

LAWYER'S NOTES

L_

L -

'-J

PAGE LINE

.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

OPENING REMARKS

M o d e r a t o r , Dr. Mike Hamnett, R e s e a r c h C o r p o r a t i o n o f UH

THE MODERATOR: Good morning everyone. Aloha. We'd

like to get started. We have a very fuli day.

My name is Mike Hamnett, I'm the executive director

of the Research Corporation of the University of Hawai'i,

and I'm also on the Advisory Group for the Integrated

Resource Planning process and cochair of the Energy Policy

Forum. I apologize. As I say, we have a very full day.

The purpose of this meeting, for those of you who

don't know why you're here, is that this has been organized

as part of the Integrated Resource Planning process.

That's the IRP that some people don't know what it is,

which is part of Hawaiian Electric's long-range planning,

and it's a process that is sanctioned by the Public Utility

Commission as a process for each of the regulated utilities

in Hawai^i. We're here to find out, to learn about global

warming and greenhouse gas emissions and how those things

are related, and we're here to learn about the technologies

that may be available to address that issue. And we' re

here to kind of help Hawaiian Electric to think about what

to do with the whole issue of greenhouse gas emissions,

As somebody who's been involved in energy planning and

in global warming policy work for about 17 years, I never

CARNAZ.ZO COURT REPORTING COMPANY, LTD. (808) 532-0222

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

thought I'd be here. I never thought that our society

would give this kind of attention to greenhouse gas

emissions and to global warming. There were people talking

about this a long time ago, and it's now -- it's now

actually starting to be talked about by Hawaiian Electric

Company, by the U.S. administration, and by a whole bunch

of people that didn't talk about this five years ago.

The agenda today, we have four panels. The -- the --

for those of you who have the agenda, you can see that the

first one's on Background on Climate Change Issues. The

second one is on Policy Implications for Hawai'i. The

third one is Options and Strategies for Controlling

Greenhouse Gas Emissions. And the final one is

Incorporating Climate Change Into the Integrated Resource

Planning Process. We do have a very full agenda. I've

been asked to be -- to move this along, so I'm gonna ask

the speakers to stay to their time, and my body language is

such that people will know when they've run out of time,

Just a couple of issues that you need to be aware of.

The young woman sitting down here next to me is a court

reporter. Today's proceedings will be recorded. 'Olelo

will also be videotaping the proceedings, so if you don't

want yourself on camera, I suggest you move to the back of

the auditorium.

The format for the panel sessions, each speaker wiil

CARNAZZO COURT REPORTING COMPANY, LTD- (808) 532-0222

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

deliver their presentation. Terry Surles gets the blessing

of having 30 minutes. Everybody else has got 15, and then

there will be a half an hour questions and answers at tihe

end of each panel.

In terms of questions, there are these green sheetis

available. Please write down your questions and give them

to folks to bring up here, and we'll go ahead and deal with

those from here. Your handouts also include an agenda,

speaker biographies, and a synopsis of the lunchtime movie.

Also on the table outside there's an evaluation form that

we would ask you people to -- ask folks to please fill out.

I'm now supposed to introduce Robbie Aim, who I don't

know whether he's here yet. So in his stead, Kaiulani

DeSilva from Hawaiian Electric Company.

MS. DESILVA: Good morning, and thank you for joining

us this morning. Robbie got tied up with a conference

call, so he will be joining us in a few minutes. But in

his stead I just wanted to welcome you all and to

acknowledge that this is a very important meeting for

Hawaiian Electric Company. There's been a lot of

recognition from our company and statewide about the

importance of the issue of global warming and climate

change, and I think this meeting is important in hearing

from many sectors of our community about this issue anc,

where our state wants to go with it. So we look forward to


1

2

3

A

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the discussion today. We want to really encourage everyone

in the audience to ask questions. That is the purpose of

today, is to get the discussion moving forward and to hear

what the concerns are from our community.

From our company, and from Robbie's perspective

especially, too, we are really looking at what our state

can do to really develop our own Hawai'i model and to take

a step forward in doing that today. It just starts a long

process going forward.

We do want to acknowledge Senator Kokubun and

Representative Morita for hosting us today and sponsoring

this session here. And we'd like to acknowledge members of

our Integrated Resource Planning Group, who is our advisory

group in our long-range planning process, for being here

today.

A lot of this session was really created thanks to

some feedback from Henry Curtis and our Integrated Resource

Planning Group. We tried to get everyone's ideas about how

to formulate today and how to move forward with this

discussion, so we want to acknowledge the Consumer

Advocate, the PUC, our advisory group for helping us create

today's agenda.

Later on today we will also be doing a tree giveaway,

so for those who are interested in taking up a personal and

individual step towards addressing global warming, we will


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

be doing that later on with a hundred native Hawaiian trees

that will be given away later on this afternoon. And we

will be presenting each of our speakers with a tree in

appreciation for your time in coming today. Overall, tihank

you for being here, and we look forward to the discussion.

Thanks.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Kaiulani.

I'd like to ask the first panel to please move up onto

the platform here.

I also wanted to recognize Nina Morita, Representative

Morita, who's been a real leader both in the energy area

and the environmental area. And she's been a real

inspiration to people in the Energy Policy Forum, and I

want to thank her for all her efforts.

The first panel is Background on Climate Change. We

have four speakers. I've known most of them for quite

few years. Our first -- and their bios are actually iri

your -- in your packet.

The -- our first speaker is Terry Suries. Terry Has

several hats. It's like me. I have several hats. That's

why Terry and I have so much hair, from taking them on and

putting them off. Terry is now with the Hawai'i Natural

Energy Institute as one of his hats. I've known Terry

a few years, and he comes from a long history of

involvement in climate change and in greenhouse gas

for


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

emissions. He did the -- he started his first greenhouse

gas emission modeling in 1980, which is even before I got

involved in the global change business.

Our second speaker is Dr. John Tantlinger from

Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism.

Several of us have been involved in with what was the

Energy Division and -- for several years. And I go back

with John to about 1993 when we did the first Hawai'i

Integrated Energy Plan.

And then finally, a close friend and colleague from

the University of Hawai'i, Chip Fletcher. Chip and I have

worked on natural disaster and erosion issues in Hawai'i

for about 15 years.

So I'm gonna go ahead and turn this -- turn the

microphone over to Terry to give the first presentation,

and this is an overview of greenhouse gas issues. Terry,

thank you.

AN OVERVIEW OF THE GREENHOUSE GAS ISSUE

Dr. Terry Sur les , Hawaii Natural Energy I n s t i t u t e

DR. SURLES: I'm picking this up. Again, since Mike

and I are somewhat follicley challenged, what he's gonna do

to tell me I'm done is to shine a flashlight off the top of

this head, and that will inform me.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Okay. So at any rate, I characterize this as a

primer. And my classic line is from a -- my classic line

is to -- is from a Second C i t y Review in Chicago, which is,

"See you real soon, and I'm off to the 30 Years' War." And

I think you have to keep some humor about this because it

is deadly serious, and it's at least a 30 years' war.

Now for those of you who want to go out and get a cup

of coffee, this is my final slide. And the final slide is

simply that the warming is unequivocal, and it's now

evident from all observations, increases at the --

increases in global average air and ocean temperatures,

widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global mean

sea levels that we're having -- you know, we're having

warming of planet.

And I'll talk about IPCC in a littie bit. Their

latest, their first report in six years, just came out

April, and I'll be talking to that in a little bit.

The other thing I'd like to point out -- and this

slide that I've used in the past. And I think I appreciate

that Mina has been willing to host this because I think

public-private partnerships are critical, that if you're

looking to the utility to solve this problem by themselves,

they ain't; and if you're looking to the public sector to

develop things on their own that's gonna solve this

problem, they're not either. So these issues can't be

in

IS a


10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

e

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

resolved without partnerships. And I characterize this for

some of the real -- on one hand, the real environmental

zealots that says, we're gonna get a free lunch out of

this. Well, we're not. You know, this is going to be

expensive to get on top of, but it's like the Fram oil

filter that if you don't start getting on top of it now,

it's gonna cost a huge amount of money later for our

children and our grandchildren. So pay me now or pay me

later. We've got to get on top of this now.

So the main points of this, I'm gonna do a quick

review of the basic science because it's surprising at

times how many people really don't know what greenhouse gas

effect is. I'm gonna talk about the IPCC report and

actually kind of juxtapose that with what I characterize as

some feelings and thoughts from Flat Earth Society folk and

then -- and then some options that are available that

Gary -- that Gary asked me to talk about. And I think and

I talked to Henry Curtis about this. It's not we're

getting information from other people. Hawai'i can be a

leader on this. And I'm quite sincere about that, and I

know a number of other people here are equally sincere.

Okay. Some history: As an old broken-down scientist

and spectroscopist, John Tyndall who's spectroscopist who

really quantified the greenhouse gas effect. And the

greenhouse effect is simply we get solar radiation coming


11

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

in in a variety of wavelengths, from just a complete

electromagnetic spectrum. What gets radiated out to space

from reflection -- and it's why we can see the Earth as we

can from the moon and so on. We get most of this radiated

out to space, but some of it stays in as heat. And that's

because a number of these greenhouse gases absorb infrared

radiation and effectively keep the heat in our atmosphere.

So that's what the greenhouse gas effect is; simply put,

that we absorb infrared radiation with certain gases that

are in the atmosphere, and I'11 talk about them later.

Now we are a greenhouse gas planet. Now granted. Mars

is further from the sun and Venus is closer; but Venus has

runaway climate change, if you will, because they're

primarily carbon dioxide. But the Earth, if it wasn't for

greenhouse gases, would be quite a bit colder, about, as it

shows, 34 degrees C colder. And so, in other words, rather

than being about 60 degrees fahrenheit as an average Earth

temperature, we'd be a little below zero degrees fahrenheit

as an Earth temperature. So it's not only the gases we'11

be talking about, but water vapor is the most important

greenhouse gas. And you might imagine as things get

warmer, there's more water vapor in the air, and you get a

more -- and you get these positive feedbacks.

Now the point of this slide is that it's not that some

scientist woke up in 1990 and wanted a job in greenhouse


12

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

gases predictions. But this -- we've been worried about

this for a while, and the predictions have been being made

since the 1880s. And a lot of the seminal work was done in

the fifties by Roger Revelle from Scripps, leading to,

during the international geophysical year 1957/1958, a

setting of the Mauna Loa Carbon Dioxide Observatory with

Charles Keeling setting it up. And Keeling just recently

passed away I think within the past year or so.

And basically what we see is a monotonical increase of

carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from the time we started

this until current. And the reason it goes up and down is

the majority of the land surface is in the Northern

Hemisphere, and because of that, the -- in the growing

season, some of the carbon dioxide is sucked up, and -- but

in the wintertime it's released. So the peaks are

wintertime; and the lows for every year are the summertime.

Okay. Now it's not oniy carbon dioxide, but it's

methane and nitrous oxide, and these are all industrial --

related to our industrial activities or man-made

activities. I think as some of you know, some of the

methane generation comes from rice paddies, for example.

So -- but it clearly is anthropogenic drivers, man-made

drivers that effect the increase in these -- in these

gases

Now I kind of switched to an earlier slide because


13

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

there were a lot of senate hearings on this. Senator

Inhofe, who considers climate change a fraud. Congressman

Barton -- I might say they're both from oil states, one

from Oklahoma and the other from Texas -- and Michael

Crichton, who's a science fiction writer, have been

poo-pooing this; and effectively they brought in Dr. Mann,

not to ask him how his science was, but to question where

he was getting his funding and why he came up with these

curves.

The point here is even though there are some people

that question these concerns early on, effectively the

technical people that questioned them have since all

recanted, that these are valid, showing that there's been a

significant increase just due to industrial activity in the

very recent past.

So the point here is — and I use this slide for

something else -- where we really don't know what

precipitation may look like in the mid latitudes in the

future, because it's hard for our models to show that,

as you look at the lower graph, the uncertainty is not

whether climate change will occur or not; it's whether

future is gonna be bad or worse. And a lot of times the

nay sayers have got on top of this by saying, well,

scientists can't agree. As you look at the lower slide,

it's just -- they disagree as to the detail, not to the

But

the


14

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

trends.

So the most recent information -- now the IPCC is the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and this is a

multinational panel, multi-institutional panel established

in the early nineties. I actually think the first meeting

might have been in the late eighties. A lot of the

infrastructure was established following the Rio de Janeiro

Summit in 1992 and with the support, I might add, of the

administration at the time, which was the Bush 1

administration.

So now I'm gonna get into some of the information we

have now, and the information we get now is quite

concerning, to say the least. It's getting worse, not

better. We know that climate change is occurring. The

amount of fossil emissions over the past half decade is

increasing as compared to where it was in the -- in the

1990s. And so therefore, the radiative forcing of carbon

dioxide has increased by 20 percent over the past ten

years, past ten years we have data for, which is the

largest of any decade in our last 200 years, meaning since

the start of the industrial era where we start burning a

lot of coal. So the global mean factors, as we can see,

are actually rising faster with time rather than slowing

down, and you can see the warmest 12 years have all

occurred since 1990, and 11 of the 12 years have all


15

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

occurred since 1995.

This is a little complicated slide, but the gist of

this is there's a lot of anthropogenic forcings here. This

is one of Jim Hansen's slides from NASA, and I take it many

of you know Jim's been in the news a lot challenging the

administration, that they've been trying to muzzle him.

The -- basically the reds and the yellows and the oranges

to the right of the one bar basically show these are four

things that enhance the warming of the climate. And the

others, such as aerosols, cloud albedo, surface albedo

interestingly enough, as we convert forests to crops, we

actually reduce the amount of climate change, interestingly

enough.

So -- but overall, the net effect of anthropogenic

forcings is a considerable amount, and so we can track

this. And so we track this with our models, and the model

shows -- the lower one shows that the solar plus volcanic,

which is the blue line -- if we model only solar and

volcanic issues -- volcanic, by the way, puts a lot of

particulates in the air, and it causes solar cooling td a

degree or climate cooling. But it shows, as we look at

this, our trend lines, you can't -- you can't match the

trend lines with what really happened modeling only natural

activities, meaning solar and volcanic. But if you model

all activities, meaning the anthropogenic and natural --


16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

that's the upper graph -- ali four things match the

observations over a period of time. So the models on a

global level we were pretty comfortable with now work

pretty well.

So Gary wanted me -- Gary Hashiro wanted me to show

some basically NASA slides. This is the trends over the

past hundred years, and the surface basically shows that in

most parts of the world it's been warming and more

significantly so in the polar area. Interestingly enough,

some pieces cool, such as the southeast United States,

The -- there is -- although this, the global ocean -- I

think Chip's gonna talk to this. There is -- clearly ocean

levels are rising. At the San Francisco Golden Gate, it's

risen seven inches over the past century. Also in the

troposphere there is a conversation that some of the early

information was showing a cooling, and we now -- the later

information that's in the IPCC report shows that that's

also warming.

Okay. So from a paleoclimate perspective, what do we

have? We show that most certainly this is -- the warmth of

the last half century is unusual for at least the past 1300

years and that the last time the polar regions were

significantly warmer was about 125,000 years ago. So

implications on things like sea level rise is -- if you get

a lot of melting of, say, the Greenland ice sheet, you can


17

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

see a significant, meaning on the order of 15 feet, sea

level rise.

Okay. What are the projections for the future? These

are different scenarios of all this, and I'm not going to

go into describe them. As you see, the gray bands are all

the error bars on where they might be. But the point is,

is that we can anticipate a likely range of 2 degrees,

2 degrees centigrade; and in a high scenario, as much as

4 degrees centigrade. I have another slide that basically

shows we can actually end up with higher temperature

increases.

The temperature increases look like this. In the more

modest scenarios, which are the top scenarios, we still see

warming, particularly in the polar regions. In the more

aggressive scenarios where we continue to burn a lot of

coal and a lot of fossil fuels, we see significant changes

in the polar regions, and basically everything warms up.

Okay. Now Gary also asked me to talk about something

about precipitation and drought. I'm not gonna spend time

going through this bullet chart other than point to the

final two bullets that in the subtropics and the tropic

region, with which Hawai'i needs to be concerned, you can

anticipate more intense and longer droughts and

desertification on land masses. And basically you can see

the drought is -- has been increasing over a period of


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

time, and we can see -- we expect that to continue to

increase,

The other thing that should -- that was mentioned in

the recent IPCC report -- this is an earlier slide that I

think is more apropos -- is that while we don't really know

much about how hurricanes are formed, there is a

correlation between hurricane intensity and the sea

level -- surface sea level temperatures. And as I told

somebody in Southern Company Utility after Katrina

demolished Mississippi, Mississippi Power & Light, how many

more Katrinas do you want to deal with?

So what do we see from the projections for future

changes? Anthropogenic warming and sea level rise is

certainly going to continue for centuries due to the time

scales associated with the feedbacks even if we stabilize

the emissions and concentrations. Temperatures in excess

of what we project will eventually melt the Greenland ice

sheet; and as I mentioned, it can raise the sea level

significantly and comparable to what it was 125,000 years

ago. And it's certainly very likely that hot extremes and

droughts in the tropics and subtropics will continue. And

for the mid latitudes, significant precipitation events are

gonna become more frequent.

Okay. Technology, policy instruments. Technology's

the key, and I hope this afternoon some people are going to


19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

be talking about this. And technology needs to be linked

off

in

to public policy. We're on a trajectory that takes us

the chart. And so if we even want to hit the red line

the middle, we need 75 -- by 2100, we need 75 percent of

our electricity to be non-fossil, end use efficiency

increases on the order of a percent a year, electricity

generation being 67 percent efficient by 2050, and

passengers vehicles at 50 miles per gallon. It's not just

the utilities; it's what we do personally with our

transportation. And we need other technologies if we

really want to reduce things. So if we want to stabilize

at 550 parts per million, which is double the prelndustrial

concentration, we need to be a carbon intensity, which is

carbon emissions per gross domestic product, on the order

of less than 10 percent of today by 2100.

So I say this is a carbon management challenge from

the technology. There's no silver bullet, unique

portfolios. I've listed some of them here. And we also

need to track life cycles because some of the things we

think are good are not so hot when you start really looking

at the life-cycle emissions. Renewable energy, this is the

big picture. EPRI does this update yearly. We're getting

there with many of these, but the issues remain. And in

fact, HNEI is working on some of the these projects.

Efficiency, we can do it with efficiency. This is one


20

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

of our favorite ones, that the efficiency of refrigerators

over time has increased drastically and, by doing so, has

removed the need for many gigawatts' worth of electricity

across the country. But the problem is that when this

administration speaks to voluntary programs, the energy

intensity improvements that we're getting right now because

of efficiency in the United States on -- for energy

intensity effectively track what the voluntary program is

that the admission says, so basically a business-as-usuai

model,

Okay. Gary also wanted me to say something about

sequestration. This is, simply put, in geological storage,

putting carbon dioxide underground in primarily saline

aquifers, although there could be some research activities

that you could use in -- research activities you could take

advantage of here in the state if you're interested because

there is research going on with basaltic formations,

although I don't know if they're gonna play out.

If we're going to seriously deploy carbon capturing

storage -- you may see this as CCS -- we need to employ

deep saline formations around the world because the other

things we want to use, which is enhanced oil recovery, you

know, depleted gas base and stuff just doesn't get us

there. So it's an opportunity, but it's also something

that we don't know is gonna work yet. And if we want to


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

continue to use coal because of national security issues,

we really have to look at this as an option.

Okay. Now there's a number of policy activities

underway to address the problem. You all know about the

Kyoto Protocol, and I have a slide next on the European

Union. There is, within the United States, two big things

to talk about: the RGGI, which -- the Regional Greenhouse

Gas Initiative in the northeast, which is nine states,

variety of institutions coming together in a bipartisan

fashion -- in fact, I should point out I've been kind of

slamming this administration, but the mode of force

beyond -- for crediting RGGI was George Pataki of New York,

who's a Republican. So this is bipartisan we have to work

on together. And I think most people that are gonna work

on this from both parties are gonna want to do the right

thing, and it's just people out of the oil patch are not

enthused about doing this, or people out in coal country

are not enthused about doing this. So the nine states and

institutions are coming together in a bipartisan fashion.

They've developed a program to go on line in January of

2009. They have a number of offsets in place. These ••-

I've listed a few.

However, there is some bad news, and one of the bad

news is they're just focusing only on electricity. And I

don't think that gets you there. You need to focus on all


22

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

emitters of greenhouse gases. And the other thing that the

utilities are concerned about is what somebody in western

New York -- what's to prevent them from buying electricity

more cheaply from First Energy or AEP from a plant that's

located in Ohio? So that's the concern called leakage that

they really need to address, and my feeling is they haven't

grabbed a hold of that well.

The AB 32, a lot of you have heard about this in

California. Once again, the good news is everybody agrees

this is a problem somebody needs -- we need to deal with.

The bad news right now is I think as it's rolling out --

and I'm frankly more familiar with this than I want to

be -- is that there's a leap of faith here, that there's --

there's goals being set that have no reality to what other

public policy instruments you need to put into place and

what other technologies you need to put into place that are

going to make this happen. And so the linkage is not

there, and I frankly -- and this is a personal opinion. I

don't think they put much thought into how they're gonna

get at these goals in the same way that I don't think

they're gonna achieve a renewable portfolio standard of

33 percent by 2020.

Okay. Carbon markets, one of the things we want to do

with the new law here in Hawai'i is, as you develop these,

you really need to have sourcing baselines. You really


23

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

need to be able to quantify your emission sources, and

need to understand what your sinks and potential sinks

you

are ,

That allows you then to get into cap-and-trade programs.

The Kyoto trade has some under this. There is, again, the

European trading scheme I'm talking about in a second. And

this has worked rather effectively. The Clean Air Act

passed under Bush 1 had cap-and-trade for sulfur oxides and

nitrogen oxides -- do I need to slow down? Cap-and-trade

mechanism -- okay. I'm almost done.

They have cap-and-trade mechanisms for sulfur dioxide

and nitrogen oxide. And overall, while you can debate

this, you're really racheting down sulfur emissions anc

nitrogen emissions in the country, and it's basically been

a good thing that works effectively and economically

effectively and allows you to achieve some environmental

goals. Now for something ubiquitous as carbon dioxide,

whether cap-and-trade would work I think remains to be

seen. There are credit markets. The Kyoto Protocol has a

clean development mechanism that allows developing

countries to get in on some of these things, some of this

in terms of trading reduced emissions for compliance

purposes. And then there's also the Chicago Climate

Exchange that is really under development. I think I would

characterize this as still something that's emerging out of

the box, but it's not clear to me that it's an appropriate

CARNAZZO COURT REPORTING COMPANY, LTD, (808) 532-022;2

• 24

u

1 model to go with for the moment, and certainly not for the

2 state.

3 There's other volunteer schemes that work very well.

4 The renewable energy credits that are now sold and traded

5 are positive things to enhance renewed reductions in -- or

6 excuse me -- enhance the production of energy by renewable

7 means and, therefore, in most cases would reduce carbon

8 dioxide. The problem here is additionallty. If you're

9 going to develop renewable technologies and put them in

10 place, are we going to -- are we -- are we doing -- if

11 we're doing this already because it's a requirement under

12 regulations, then you don't want to also sell the credits

13 because you're already doing it. You want to sell credits

14 for something that's over and above regulatory

15 requirements.

16 And then finally, the carbon tax issue, I think it's

17 important to consider, but it's got to be fair to all

18 economic sectors. It's one of the reasons that some

19 utilities in the -- in parts of the United States are

20 looking at possible carbon taxes, but they wanted to be

21 fairto everyone, which obviously would include, you know,

22 not only tax them but also tax transportation. It must be

23 societally fair. Carbon taxes, on the face of it, in my

24 opinion, will tend to be regressive taxes.

25 So the European trading scheme, I think the point here

L_


• 25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

is that this is a cap-and-trade launch. It's gone through

a lot of fluctuations, but it is the first of a kind that

allows trading between nations, 27 nations, and it covers

almost half of all of the emissions. And I think to get at

that point over that many nations is a good thing. And I

got this slide from Adam Diamant from Pepperdine.

Okay. So the final thing, kind of coming back to what

I said, I think, again, it's much appreciated we're here

today in the auditorium because it is not only about

technology development and public policy and its -- the

Integrated Resource Planning exercise, but how do we link

all of those to make advances? And the issue with a lot of

tech weenies, of which I hang around them a lot, is that

they think you can follow the top line and get to new

technologies. But my sense is if you're not involving

institutions, public perception, regulations and other

incentives, you're simply not gonna get there. You need to

link public policy instruments with R and D.

We want to drive to a sustainable future. My feeling

is Hawai'i can be a leader, that we have the resources

here. I think that in -- as Mike said at the beginning, we

have the will here to do it, and I think this is a kickoff

that we can do it.

Well, warming isn't gonna wait. Will we? Thanks.

THE MODERATOR: Terry, that was really terrific.


26

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Thanks very much.

I want to remind people that there are question sheets

on the back of the packets that you picked up.

The other thing I want to remind the speakers, because

we're gonna stick to the time, is that the slides will

be -- the Power Point presentations will be available on

the HECO website. So for those who don't get entirely

through their presentation, that wiil be available. Also,

you can pinch Terry's slides out of -- off that website as

well. Again, thanks, Terry.

Our second speaker is John Tantlinger from the

Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism.

I'm not sure what -- how many hats John wears, given the

circumstance. But John's gonna give us an Overview of

Hawai' i Greenhouse Gas Inventory. And his division within

DBEDT has been sort of on the lead of trying to compile an

initial inventory of greenhouse gas emissions here in

Hawai^i, so John.

HAWAII'S GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY

Dr. J o h n T a n t l i n g e r , S t a t e o f H a w a i i , Depa r tmen t o f B u s i n e s s , Economic Development and Tour i sm

DR. TANTLINGER: Thanks, Mike. I missed what you

said, but the court reporter got it, so I'll read it later.

Good morning. Aloha. And I do have a script. If I


27

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

speak too quickly, I'll get you a copy. I promise.

I want to first thank HECO for publishing my resume,

even though I'm not looking for another job yet, but we'll

see how this presentation goes today, and particularly with

so many distinguished participants here today.

I too want to acknowledge, of course. Representative

Morita and the Public Utilities Commission, Consumer

Advocate, and any other distinguished guests whom I can't

see because of the lights being so low in the back.

You heard Mike say that my name's John Tantlinger.

He's right. And I still am. This is a tough crowd.

Giggles . All right.

But seriously, you know, I've known many of the energy

stakeholders here in the audience today for many years,| and

you know that DBEDT is one among several agencies that

support the state government's various roles in energy.

And for those who may not be as familiar, allow me just a

brief moment.

Hawai'i's State Energy Program is assigned to DBEDT's

Strategic Industries Division. State law designates that

our department director, Ted Liu, is the State of Hawai'i

Energy Resources Coordinator, or ERC, and he is the

Governor's cabinet-level energy advisor. Maurice Kaya is

DBEDT's Chief Technology Officer and also leads the

Strategic Industries Division and probably better known for


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

many years as the leader of our state energy program. So

on behalf of Ted Liu, on behalf of Maurice, who's also a

member of HECO's Integrated Resource Planning Advisory

Group, I want to thank all of you for the opportunity to

speak with you this morning and thank HECO for inviting us.

So despite that very long-winded opening, the

remainder of my presentation, Our Greenhouse Gas Inventory,

should stay within our 15 minutes by covering the topics

you see on the slide. I'll describe our Greenhouse Gas

Inventory project just to provide some context and a

general background summary of information on why and how we

did the project. We'11 look at a recent preliminary

recalculation of the baseline inventory of those emissions,

the estimates for 1990, and compare it with a preliminary

estimate for 2005 emissions. They will be presented by

categories and sectors, and they include, of course, the

electric utility emissions.

HECO's invitation to DBEDT was to present the

inventory of greenhouse gas estimates for Hawai'i. So

that's our -- that's the purpose. It's a fairly

straightforward descriptive briefing of the findings of

that analysis. You've already heard from one scientist,

and HECO's assembled a very respectable lineup of experts

in the field who are far more qualified in the science. So

my presentation's gonna stick very close to that


29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

fundamental invited purpose. And for those of you who know

me, I believe this will be a bit of a departure from other

presentations because I generally conclude with a long list

of recommendations or next steps, but I'll just conclude

with a list of a few resources for some additional

information on the topic.

So the project in the nineties was conducted jointily

by our energy program in DBEDT and the Department of

Health's Clean Energy Branch -- excuse me -- Clean Air

Branch. DBEDT focused on the energy sectors, and DOH

focused on the non-energy emissions with its contractor,

the UH Environmental Center. It was a two-phase project

that paralleled the structure of the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency's competitive grant program.

So the U.S. EPA, state and local outreach program was

awarding competitive grants in two parts. First, develop a

statewide inventory of greenhouse gas emission estimates,

and then -- and with that outline a program of statewide

greenhouse gas reduction strategies. And then part two,

phase two, states why Hawai'i had successfully completed a

phase one grant, had, I think, a bit of a competitive edge

when it came to the award of the phase two grant for

developing a climate change action plan. And therefore,

Hawai'i's project was fully funded by EPA, and they also

provided assistance in the areas that you see listed on


30

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

t h i a slide. The project was part of a -- the project and

the funding was a part of a nationwide U.S. Climate Change

Action Plan. It was designed to help the U.S. meet its

goals under the U.N. framework convention on climate

change.

The Climate Change Action Plan focused on

cost-effective emission reduction initiatives in all areas

of the economy, and it focused primarily on cooperative

volunteer efforts by government, industry, and the public.

This plan, particular plan, was unrelated to the Kyoto

Protocols that were signed later in December of 1997. And

the convention framework set the emissions baseiine at 1990

for evaluating reduction progress.

So the purpose of the project basically was to develop

statewide 1990 baseline estimates of emissions from human

activity. And the primary focus was on the three main

greenhouse gases: C02; methane, which is CH4; and nitrous

oxide, N20. And that would be the foundation then for

phase two planning and a first step for recommending

emission reduction and mitigation methods.

Now the methodology that we used to develop the

inventory is listed on the left-hand -- left hand of this

slide, and the formulas -- part of the grant criteria was

to use the formulas provided by the EPA to calculate the

emissions. .They were looking for a standard approach to


31

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

calculating emission estimates. And global warming

potential of both methane and nitrous oxide are

significantly higher because gases have more powerful

forcing radiation over a one-hundred-year time horizon that

was used in calculating global warming potential. You've

heard already from -- about that from Terry.

So global warming potential was then used to sort of

normalize into C02 equivalent for -- which is the general

practice to provide a standard measure and report on the

emissions. Carbon dioxide equivalent is then measured and

reported in short times. So the assumptions on the right

side of the chart begins with the factors that was -- that

were used for these gases in relationship to carbon

dioxide. Based on more science, EPA actually modified the

factors more recently, as you've seen noted on the chart.

And the data that we used was obtained for energy use along

with the non-energy sectors that you also see listed.

C02 emissions from — one of the assumptions was that

C02 emissions used from locally grown biomass for energy

production was assumed would be sequestered during the

replanted growth process. The estimate does not include

exported fuels or overseas fuel uses or military aviation

fuels. Now these are fuels that are not used in Hawai'i;

and therefore, this approach is actually consistent with

the principles of Kyoto.


32

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

So I've gone through five slides, and you still

haven't seen any emissions estimates, and that's what this

slide's for. Now I don't expect those of you in the back

of the room to be able to read all the notes on the right

side of the slide from the projected image, but they're

important, and when you do see copies of the slide, they're

there just to give you an understanding of the assumptions

and method that I've already generally covered.

The information is also related to how the data are

updated; for example, by using improved data that we've

been able to acquire since the first set of estimates. And

these estimates also incorporate the updated GWP factors.

So what the table shows are preliminary estimates of

Hawai'i's baseline 1990 greenhouse gas emissions and

estimates for 2005 emissions. It was calculated first as a

working draft in January and then slightly revised just

last month.

The percentage change between 1990 and 2005, we can

see, in each emissions category and sector is noted in the

far right column here. Now residential, commercial,

industrial energy emissions show the greatest increase.

And I think we really owe some of that to the fact that we

actually have better data quality and more complete, so it

contributed to a more accurate allocation of data among the

emission categories. Those emissions include the use of


33

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

utility and non-utility gas; non-highway diesel, gasoline,

and propane; and distributor generators that use fossil

fuels; CHP and several other stationary uses.

The electric utility sector shows the third greatest

relative growth in energy emissions at 14.7 percent. I't

includes emissions from both utility-owned generation and

from the IPPs for the fuel that they use to generate the

power that they sold to the utility.

Ground transport emissions from the highway vehicle

use increased 28 percent. Domestic aviation and marine

emissions are from interisland aircraft and ship travel and

to and from the mainland. That decreased by 4.2 percent.

Primarily we think that's due to aviation aircraft

efficiency, their engine efficiency. International

transport fuel use declined significantly by 26.6 percent,

and so the international aviation fuel emissions declined

30.1 percent, reflecting, we think, both the use of more

efficiency aircraft and international visitor counts.

Decreases in international marine fuel consumption, we

think, also contributed.

Non-energy uses increased 14.4 percent, we think

mostly due to landfill and wastewater treatment emissions

and despite declines in agricultural and the closure of the

cement production plant in Hawai'i.

So overall, the preliminary estimate shows that our


34

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

total emissions in Hawai'i increased by 7.5 percent in 2005

compared to 1990. And this actually compares to a 16.3

percent increase in nationwide emissions as reported and

estimated by the EPA. Now I'll tell you, DBEDT is not

prepared to attempt to explain the reasons for the

difference in the estimated emissions growth or the

variance between Hawai'i and the rest of the country

because considerably more analysis would be needed for us

to understand and be able to explain that.

I want to emphasize once more, these remain

preliminary estimates. I think it's important to note this

is due primarily to functional and resource constraints on

our program. I mentioned the initial program was a

multi-year effort. It was very adequately funded. It was

conducted by a team of professionals. In addition to

DBEDT, DOH, UH Environmental Center, we got support from

DLNR, Department of Agriculture, Public Utilities

Commission, the counties, and several other supporters and

helpers on that project.

I really want to acknowledge somebody who's not here

today. He's on a well-deserved vacation, and that's Steve

Albert. He's an energy planner in my office. He's been

single-handedly working on maintaining as best he can these

estimates and trying to keep the model as up to date as he

possibly can. And another person I think deserves some


35

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

recognition, and that's our research statistician, Doug

Oshiro. He's our only energy data staff professional, and

he's been working very hard to try to improve the quality

and consistency of our data functions.

Now I think this comparison of emission categories and

sectors is actually more useful to people like me who'd

rather read a comic book than a novel. Jeez, this is

tough. This is a tough crowd. Okay. With all these

numbers, you know, I don't know -- if I don't use a little

humor, very little humor, I'm afraid I might even go to

sleep during the presentation.

But what these graphs illustrate is that even with

what appeared to be significant declines in, you know,

proportional energy-related emissions overall, the energy

sector and electricity generation, ground transportation in

particular, particularly because of their scale, still

represent the vast majority of greenhouse gas emission

sources .

With that, I think I'd be remiss, given our program,

if I didn't mention that whether greenhouse gas emissions

are regulated or not, our priority, state's priority on

reducing these emissions we really believe needs to remain

focused on increasing energy efficiency, expanding the use

of indigenous renewable energy resources, displacing the

use of imported fossil fuels, particularly imported oil,


36

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

because it represents such a large share of our energy

production. And we think it's really a no-regret strategy,

that whether or not greenhouse gas emissions get regulated

now, sometime in the future, there's no reason to wait to

continue to aggressively pursue these strategies.

So before I conclude, as with any type of statistical

estimations, there are limitations. You've heard what some

of those are. There are assumptions that are used. And I

think it's just important that I clearly state those in a

presentation like this. When we -- here are just a few

more .

When we did our preliminary update, we found that

acquisition of new data was needed to increase the

accuracy. We did that as best we could, but a lot of work

still needs to be done on improving getting the right data.

Data transparency could be a consideration. Let me just

quickly mention that fuel data is confidential and

proprietary under state law. It's possible, depending on

the level of detail of reporting emissions, to be able --

to then back -- work backwards and be able to identify

reporters, actual individual reporters of certain data. So

a lot of care has to be taken there.

We're continuing to work with the EPA in improving the

reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, particularly in

clean energy. And we've joined among 14 other states with


37

1 EPA in their Clean Energy Environment State Partnership.

2 Greenhouse gas emission reduction for Hawai'i is one of our

3 key issues.

4 I wanted to also mention a related limitation of the

5 particular models we're using because EPA experts notec

6 just a couple of weeks ago in one of ouir teleconference

7 meetings that these models were really developed to

8 increase understanding and awareness. They lack the

9 precision and -- from their perspective/ and they designed

10 the models. They lacked the precision for regulatory

11 purposes. So resources permitting, we're going to continue

12 to improve use of additional places to get some

13 information.

14 I want to note that the inventory -- sorry, but it's

15 not gonna be reposted on our web -- there's been some

16 changes -- until June 15th, but it will be up there.

17 Again, thank you all very much for this opportunity to

18 speak with you today. And HECO, thank you very much for

19 inviting DBEDT. Thank you.

20 THE MODERATOR: Thanks, John.

21 This is a real good start on — I know the legislature

22 just passed a bill that would require considerable more

23 inventory work, and some resources will be made available

24 to do that. But thanks to Steve Albert and John Tantlinger

25 and the staff at DBEDT.

CARNAZZO COURT REPORTING COMPANY, LTD. (808) 532-022;2

The final speaker for this panel is Chip Fletcher.

Chip's with the UH Department of Geology and Geophysics in

what I refer to as the School of Earth, Wind & Fire; but I

think the dean calls it School of Ocean and Earth Sciences

and Technology. So I've worked for Chip for many years.

He's gonna talk to us about the Impact of Climate Changes

on Shorelines in Hawai'i.

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

IMPACT TO HAWAII'S SHORELINES

Dr. Chip F l e t c h e r , UH Department of Geology and Geophysics

DR. FLETCHER: Thank you, Mike. I'd also like to

thank HECO and the Integrated Resource Planning Advisory

Group for sponsoring the session today. This is very

educational. Terry and John gave fantastic talks. I hope

I'm up to the same task.

I'm going to talk to you today about sea level rise.

The IPCC report that came out a few months ago, as most of

you know who pay attention to that group, finished taking

new science over a year ago, and so I thought I would focus

on new research that has come on line in more recent times

since 19 -- or, excuse me, since 2007.

There's been a double melting rate of the Greenland

ice sheet that's been tracked using data that's only a few

years old. The combined budget of -- of ice sheet dynamics


39

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

in Greenland amounts to melting of 57 cubic miles per y ear.

S cl There's net melting of the Antarctic ice sheet, which i;

new realization. The question had been up until very

recently whether or not Antarctica would actually

ameliorate -- excuse me -- counter sea level rise by

gaining ice, but the most recent data indicates that it's

actually experiencing net retreat of 36 cubic miles per

year. I'm going to talk about each of these in a little

bit more detail in a minute.

Global sea level rise has now been documented to

exceed 3 millimeters per year. All through the 20th

century the big debate was whether or not global sea level

rise was 1.5 millimeters per year or as high as

2 millimeters per year. We never really settled on that

question, and we put a couple of satellites up that have

been orbiting for the last 18 years, and they are

documenting now today this year a rate of rise of

3.4 millimeters per year. Now for the first time, just in

the last few months, the uncertainty, the plus or minus

value on that 3.4 millimeters per year, leaves 3.0 behind.

Global sea level rises at 3.4 plus or minus .3 millimeters

per year. So we are quickly leaving behind the rate of sea

level rise that we experienced in the 20th century.

Continued heating of the atmosphere and heating of the

water column also contribute to global sea level rise. The


40

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

main forces on global sea level rise are melting of the

main ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica and also the

warming of the water column, the warming of the oceans. As

you know, as you warm something, it expands, and this leads

to what's know as thermal sea level rise or steric sea

level rise.

And I'm going to show you our most recent science that

indicates a 1 meter rise is now expected during this

century. I think this is a good planning horizon. One

meter by the end of this century I think is an appropriate

planning horizon and actually potentially a conservative

planning horizon.

If we fulfill a 3 degree sea temperature rise this

century, then it suggests, based on geologic evidence,

perhaps as much as 3 to 6 meters of sea level rise. And

that geologic evidence comes to us from 125,000 years ago

when we were last in a warm period, an interglacial, which

is similar to the one that we've been enjoying for the last

10,000 years which has lead to the rise of our modern

civilization. The last time climate was like this was

125,000 years ago, and between then and now we've gone

through an ice age. Well, then sea level was higher, and

temperatures were slightly higher; and if we reproduce

those conditions, then we're in for, you know, a 3 to 6

meter rise in sea level.


41

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

There are still major uncertainties in sea level

science, but these latest results are significant in that

they do not point in the direction of smaller rates of

rise. They are consistent with the worst case of

longstanding predictions. And the counter-arguments

against this grow fewer and fewer. And so I think the

prudent thing for us to do is to examine the evidence aind

to identify for ourselves what sort of appropriate planning

horizon we should be moving towards.

This is a nice graphic showing Greenland ice loss. Xn

pink is the area that was mapped as experiencing net

retreat or net melting as of 1992. In red is new data

experiencing net retreat of the Greenland ice sheet in

2005. In white is area that is still accumulating.

There's a net amount of positive side to the ice balance

there. This change from 1992 to 2005 represents a doubling

in the -- in fact, excuse me, a tripling in the rate of ice

lost.

Here's the data from 1979 to 2005. You can see that

there's a lot of variability in the total melt of the

Greenland ice sheet. There is this net trend with a slope

on it, an upward trend indicating an increase in melted

ares in the Greenland ice sheet. But there is a high

degree of variability here, and so from a purely

statistical and scientific point of view, it's difficult to


42

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

extract from this a rate that is representing a long-term

trend, but now the data extend back far enough that the

rate is significant. But continued monitoring is extremely

important so that we understand the dynamics of the

Greenland ice sheet.

The Antarctic ice loss is shown here. It's not a long

time data set. It only extends back to 2002. And you

might see in there a pattern almost of oscillation. There

might be something of a cycle taking place here, in which

case it's really difficult to say that we have yet

established a long-term trend in Antarctic ice loss,

especially given the short time period of our data set. So

we're still watching Antarctica very carefully, and it's

extremely important that we put up the instruments in the

air to map this ice sheet carefully.

In Antarctica -- this is a map of the Antarctic

continent. East Antarctica is still accumulating snow.

These little -- these crosses are actually meant to be plus

symbols. It's over here in the west Antarctic ice sheet

that we see net retreat, and that's what these negative

values are over here. So this is the area of Antarctica

which we think is most vulnerable to heating in the

atmosphere.

Thermal expansion is modelled again and again with

various global circulation models as occurring on all of


4 3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

sea

some

the oceans. Basically the hotter the color here, the

greater the temperature rise, and you can see that the

surface is participating in the warming that is taking

place as well as on the continental areas. This is thi

temperature record of combined sea surface and land surface

rise. You see it extends from 1880 to the present day.

Now we can model sea level rise, but a more empirical

approach or a more direct approach is to look at our

history of sea level rise and compare it to this history of

temperature change. And so by comparing these two sets of

observations, we have a relationship that would allow us to

project sea level change into the future, if we assume

scenarios of temperature change. So this is our history of

surface temperature. And ~- well, there was supposed to be

in there a -- a history of sea level change since that

time period, 1880. Maybe it's the next slide.

Let's discuss just for a second the contributions to

sea level. Alpine glaciers and ice caps are another form

of water storage that are retreating. Alpine glaciers and

ice caps around the planet are experiencing melting, and

their contribution to global sea level is on the order of

half a meter, so they're relatively insignificant. The

contribution of Greenland to global sea level is over

7 meters, and the west Antarctic ice sheet, the one that

we're most concerned with, the contribution to global sea

same


44

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

level was 5 to 6 meters.

Sea level rise due to ice melt versus to sea level

rise due to thermal expansion, they each seem to account

for about half of the amount of the sea level rise today.

So melt water coming off the ice sheets and just the steric

heating of the ocean surface seem to account for about half

of our observed sea level rise. But overall it's important

to say that the sea level budget is poorly understood.

That is, adding up the contribution to global sea level

rise from all these sources is very poorly constrained.

That's why -- and here's the missing slide. That's

why using a more empirical approach where we track global

temperatures and compare them to global sea level rise

gives us a way to understand the future. So this has been

done by Stefan Rahmstorf in a paper published just a few

months ago in Science.

Here we have the rate of sea level change from 1881 to

2001. And here we have the warming from 1881 to 2001

compared to -- normalized to this mean. So by comparing

these two, we can understand the response of sea level to

atmospheric heating, and this is the result. The red line

represents the smooth trend of sea level change. The blue

line represents the computed trend by comparing or modeling

with the temperature trend. And the red points represent

the unsmooth data.


45

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

So based on this, a sea level rise of half a meter to

one and a half meters is projected by the year 2100 given

an IPCC temperature projection of one and a half to almost

6 degrees C this century. So if temperature rises as

projected by the IPCC, then this would be the sea level

response. So it's this basis that I recommend a 1 mete

planning horizon. Basically falls in the mid of this -

the middle of this range.

So what is the impact of this 1 meter sea level rise

here in Hawai'i? Let's look at a couple of scenarios.

Let's take a 1 meter sea level rise. Let's make it at high

tide, and let's add rain from last April; okay? Several

days last April and March we had almost a foot of rain in a

day, yeah?

One thing to remember, that as sea level rises near

the coastline, the water table which sits on it under the

land is also going to rise. So sea level rise is not just

attacking the coastline. It's going to take dry land and

turn it into wetland behind the coasts, up in the area

where we drive and live and build our buildings. And wet

land or even land that is perched only a few feet above the

water table, when it gets rained on, is our only source of

draining that rain away. So if the water table is high,

rainfall won't be able to drain. It will turn into

standing water, and we'll experience flooding based on this


46

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

ID

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

standing water.

This is already happening in Mapunapuna, the

industrial district by the airport. The storm drains there

feed into the ocean, and at high tide the ocean feeds back

up into the storm drains. There is saltwater coming up out

of the storm drains in this industrial area several times a

month during high tide. When you rain on top of that, you

develop standing pools of water. So I think this is what

life is gonna be like in the second half of the century, is

a major rain drainage problem.

Another thing that occurs in our waters is high peaks

of sea level, such as this topographic map, this dynamic

topographic map. In red and green you see what are known

as mesoscale eddies. These are piles of water larger than

the Big Island that have a sea level rise of about 2 0

centimeters, and they come through -- the come through all

the time. The major ones come through every couple of

years, and they reside -- as they pass through the

Hawaiian Islands, they reside for a few weeks. So sea

level is artificially high. To bring this point home to

you, the waves at Ala Moana Beach Park cross all the way

across the beach, and they hit that retaining wall next to

the road when one of these happens at high tide, so these

mesoscale eddies. I'm not gonna model these in my

scenarios for you.

CABNAZZO COURT REPORTING COMPANY, LTD. (808) 532-0222

47

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Another thing that raises sea level around here is our

large swell. A 15-foot open ocean wave, which we get

several times a year both from the south and from the

north, will raise sea level as much as a meter against the

coastline. This is called sea level setup. That' s not

the -- I'm not talking about the run-up of waves on the

beach. I'm talking about a still water level that is

basically the inertia of these waves, and it rises against

the shoreline. So I'm also not going to include this, so I

think I'm going to give you some sea level rise scenarios

that are relatively conservative and perhaps

under-predicting.

Okay. Here is Campbell Industrial Park. This is

major industrial center for the state. It is low lyinc

It's at Barber's Point. It's basically a coastal location.

And we have topographic LIDAR data here that has a

resolution of 20 centimeters, and so we can map what our

high tide 1 meter sea level with a foot of rainfall will do

here. And you'll see the coastal areas begin to flood. So

I think this is the sort of map that should be the basis

for analysis of where we want to be in the second half of

the century. Now I'm not familiar with the infrastructure

here in the coastal zone of the industrial park, but this

is an area of high concern. Notice also that these

hinterland areas are also experiencing conversion from dry


48

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

land

it's

this

into wetland.

Honolu

amazin

again.

lu Harbor and Honolulu, Sand Island, this area.

g what the

It turns

Boulevard is actually

Sand Islanc

processing

these areas

flooding does here. Let's look at

out that the area around Ala Moana

below 1 meter in elevation.

, where Sand Island processing plant, sewage

plant is located, the harbor itself, all of

are vulnerable to this standing water effect.

Again, notice that the coastline is not immediately

attacked by

table back

concern.

with

area

Let' s

the Al

Okay.

hearing me

sea level

behind the

rise. It's this rise of the water

coastline that I think is of greatest

look at Waikiki. I'm sure you can predict that

a Wai Cana L back there, we have a very low-lying

What about beaches? Most of you are used to

talk about beaches. Well, I think beaches are a

thing of the past, frankly. I think

this century you're not really gonna

that with 1 meter of sea level rise.

shoreline is going to look like. If

you're gonna have to find sandy land

and the beach would be the front of

in the second half of

have beaches. I think

this is what our

you want beaches.

and allow it to erode.

that sandy land that is

eroding away. And I know maybe there's two areas in this

state: Polihale Beach on Kauai and Papohaku Beach on


49

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Moloka'i where we might still have some beaches under this

scenario.

Will this impact tourism? Frankly, I don't think it

will. Let's look at one case scenario right now. Here we

have a typical resort, in this case in Maui. Many of our

resorts now are building pool facilities that sort of

replace beaches, and you'll notice there's really not much

of a beach here. When you visit this area, you still

experience the ocean, the climate, the culture. The beach

is not really part of the scene. It's the pool area where

most of our visitors are going. And, in fact, the beach in

that area really has essentially disappeared anyway.

Well, what's happening is we're replacing our beaches

with built beaches in the pool facility. That's a pile of

sand. That's Texas stream gravel that we're now importing,

and there's over a dozen resorts now where beaches are

being brought into and incorporated into the pool facility.

So I think this is really what our beaches are gonna look

like in the future.

The problem with this is the locals lose. We're the

ones who go to the beaches. We can't afford to go to these

resorts. So I think that our coastal access and our local

natural resource of the beaches is what the impact is

there. And I want to thank you for the time you've given

me .


50

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the

shee

came

They

and

dire

brea

to a

THE MODERATOR: Thanks very much, Ch

panelists.

Again, I would remind you tha t there

ts at the back of the packet you

in. Greg is on this side. Leo

'11 be prepared to collect those

I will try to read those, and

pick

s on

and

then we

ct it to the panel. We're gonna

k to allow the court reporter

H o w you to write questions.

(Whereupon, a

BACKGROUND ON CLIMATE

to

take

rest

ip. Thanks to all

are c

sd up

this

Dring

'11 a£

just

uestion

when you

side.

those up.

k -- we'll

a one-minute

her fingers and

brief recess

CHANGE

was taken.)

ISSUES

{Question a n d A n s w e r S e s s i o n

THE MODERATOR: Okay. We have a couple of questions

so far. First one would be directed to any one of the

panelists who wants to take it: Wiil climate change affect

temperatures and humidity in Hawai'i? If yes, when and how

much?

DR. SURLES: The when and how much, it's -- I think

it's -- it will certainly affect temperature, but again, as

some of the IPCC slides showed, the major impact on

temperature increases, it's going to be patchy around the

world and certainly more -- the temperatures are going to


51

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

rise faster in colder regions than they are in these

latitudes, but you would expect it to go up a bit. You

also expect that over a period of time that it would become

a bit more humid simply because there's going to be more

water vapor in the atmosphere because of overall higher

temperatures around the globe.

How these occur, you know, I don't think you wake up

one morning and say, my goodness, climate change is here

because it's gotten warmer. I think it's just an

incremental set of things that over a period of time people

are gonna notice that things have changed.

THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks, Terry.

Here's another question for Terry: If droughts will

become more common for Hawai'i, why should we shift to

growing biofuels?

DR. SURLES: That's a good question. You know, we

talked about -- and I couldn't get into it in the

technology section, but we really have to examine the life

cycle of these new technologies we're trying to bring in.

And certainly bringing in -- bringing in water-intensive

crops for biofuels is potentially a problem. We've --

excuse me. We've talked about this in terms of the demand

on water, on labor, on land, and these are certainly not

trivial demands. So the idea, as somebody said, we're

gonna be the Saudi Arabia of ethanol, is in my mind an


52

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

irresponsible thing to say. The biofuels you could be

looking at are ones that simply have less of a demand on

water and -- but again, you still are going to have to

balance them off to iand and labor demands.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Terry.

A question for Chip: With sea level rise -- with the

rising sea level, wouldn't there be greater evaporation

leading to more rainfall? And I would say the corollary to

that would be, with the temperature increases, wouldn't

there be more evaporation into rainfall?

DR. FLETCHER: I think our rainfall comes principally

from two sources: Kona systems that come in from the south

and the southwest, and the aerographic effect, which is the

trade winds which are forced to go up into high elevation

due to our high volcanic mountains where the rate of

condensation exceeds the rate of evaporation. I don't

think that the sea level rise, given the aerographic

effect, will have enough of an impact to change where

that -- the rate of condensation versus evaporation shifts

it's location. One meter of sea level rise is not going to

significantly change the local rainfall pattern.

On a more regional scale, I don't think that we

understand yet what the rainfall changes may be. What I

have seen is a projection that the climate in Hawai'i will

become more El Nino like and that -- not that we will


53

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

experience more El Ninos, but that it will become more

El Nino like. And we tend to have droughts, periods oi:

drought, during more El Nino conditions. We tend to have

more tropical cyclones, too.

DR. SURLES: May I just add, again, a lot of the

global -- the general circulation models for the globe are

now pretty effective in looking at these, but when you

start talking about rainfall patterns on a more regional or

local area, it's -- the slide I showed earlier -- it's hard

to get agreement in what they're gonna look like, what

things will look like in the future because the --

getting -- teasing out the variables and having an idea on

a regional level is still pretty much a state of art and

not a state of science.


Next question's for John: I understand that the 1990

greenhouse gas emissions data will be available on the

DBEDT website about June 15th. When and where will the

2005 data be available?

DR. TANTLINGER: I don't know, but actually, what we

can do -- what I was referring to was the report itself,

the report that was issued in -- in the nineties. It's

just a matter of mechanics with the website. But as far as

the presentation is concerned, we can post it on the

website as soon as our webmaster can do it. I'm not sure


54

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

what HECO's plans are for these presentations, but -~

THE MODERATOR: Gary's informed us that they will be

posted on the HECO IRP website as well, so -- and those

will be available in a week or so, Gary?

DR. TANTLINGER: There you go. That question was for

Gary, not for me.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks, Gary.

For Chip, how will our ability to track and monitor

the effect of global warming be affected by recent

reductions in funding for NASA's satellite program?

Second question is, besides yourself, Chip, who is

studying the specific effects of global warming on Hawai'i?

DR. FLETCHER: Well, I — I can express a personal

opinion, and I think that what's happening at NASA is -- is

unfortunate. It's gonna be great to have a guy on Mars, or

a gal. But from that perspective looking back on our

Earth, it's not gonna be a pretty sight. I think that

decreasing the funding for Earth-monitoring constellations

and satellites is a big mistake, and I think that we should

be increasing our funding and increasing our monitoring of

the Earth environment and that that should be the

primary -- a primary goal of the federal government.

Whether -- I'm not trying to prescribe mission science for

NASA, but somebody should be funding -- maintaining and

increasing rather than decreasing our satellite m.onitoring


55

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

of the planet.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Chip.

A question for Terry; I hear conflicting things on

what greenhouse gas reductions today will have on future

catastrophic changes. I've heard it takes decades for

gases to get to the upper atmosphere. Other times I hear

there will be a quick feedback response.

DR. SURLES: Okay. I think the question would be,

had -- there's -- the conflicting -- what was the first

part of that? The conflicting?

THE MODERATOR: I hear conflicting things on what

greenhouse gas reductions today will have on the future.

DR. SURLES: Okay. Basically the — the trend lines,

because of -- I think you can say -- and the

comparabilities with the chlorofluorocarbon rules that were

passed under the Montreal Protocol, that these ended up in

our stratosphere and upper stratosphere that would -- that

then would tend to decompose and effectively destroy the

ozone layer. And by controlling them, we can -- we can

make advances in that, and that is -- that's something that

-- the turnaround for that is relatively rapid. But I

characterize relatively rapid as being in a few decades.

When you look at the carbon cycle -- and it's one of

the slides that hit the cutting room floor when I was

putting together the presentation. The circulation fof


56

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

carbon dioxide will be in terms of centuries. Because the

ocean is undersaturated in carbon dioxide, most of the

carbon dioxide we're currently emitting is eventually going

to go into the ocean. However, there is a flux where at

any given point there's carbon dioxide being released from

the ocean into the atmosphere. So the net effect is even

if we stopped the carbon, the carbon dioxide emissions

almost immediately, there's a lag time that -- where we're

going to be experiencing climate change anyway. And to get

a control on this, this is why the goals of the IPCC and a

lot of the international activities are to try to stabilize

at 550 parts per million by the middle part of this century

because they know it's kind of like turning a huge ship

around. And once we do that, there's still going to be

warming.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Terry.

This is, I guess, for Terry and for Chip. This is on

sea level rise: The first speaker, Terry, indicated at

least three times the sea level rise that Chip did. Please

clarify.

with

DR.

DR.

eac

framewor

leve 1 is

SURLES: You

FLETCHER: I

1 other; they

k. I think

to present

re th

don't

just

that —

e sea 1

think

may not

my goa

scenarios that

evel

that they're inconsistent

be in the same timing

1 in

are

talking

not so

about sea

catastrophic


57

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

that you throw your hands up in the air and feel there

nothing you can do. I think it's important to present

realistic near time scenarios that we can feel that we have

the technology and the community will to do something

about.

The fear of a much larger sea level rise is very, very

real. Not the fear, but the possibility is very, very

real. I think you saw from the short time frame of our

monitoring data for Antarctica and the high variability of

the behavior of the Greenland ice sheet and the Antarctic

ice sheet that we really do not understand those two ice

sheets, and those two ice sheets are -- they are the

catalyst. They're the triggers for a global sea level

rise. We don't understand the two major effects on sea

level rise, and so it is appropriate to keep in mind some

of these more dramatic numbers such as 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

meters. They're quite possible.

DR. SURLES: Yeah, that, and I'd only add that I

actually didn't think our numbers were all that

incompatible. I know that Chip was pointing towards a

meter rise over the century, but his slides also pointed to

that if you lose the Greenland ice sheet over a period of a

century, you're going to be looking at a 4 to 6 meter sea

rise. And effectively, that's the point of the IPCC panels

that worked on this, that that is what you might anticipate


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

with that -- with the destruction of the Greenland ice

sheet.

THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks.

DR. FLETCHER: Can I say one more thing?

THE MODERATOR: Sure, Chip.

DR. FLETCHER: I think if we do experience a sea level

rise like that, society as we know it today will change

fundamentally, rapidly, and potentially catastrophically.

I think those high sea level rise scenarios should be in

everybody's mind, and they should be something that we ail

should all be thinking about.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Chip.

DR. TAYLOR; Can I follow that?

THE MODERATOR: Yeah, go ahead, Brian.

DR. TAYLOR: Just -- Brian Taylor from SOEST.

Just remember that the IPCC report very specifically

did not in their projections -- they particularly excluded

the scenario where major melting of the Greenland or

Antarctic ice sheets was included. So they said at the

time

ago.

happ

when the:^

we don't

en to

there was

put

know

it in

stopped the science

have enough in

those ice sheets.

great uncertainty.

the

, this is

collection

formation to know

They h

That'

governmental report.

highly likely. We ' re

ighlighted

s why they

But they

worried a

about a

what's g

the fact

weren't

said, you

oout it.

year

onna

that

gonna


59

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

We 're not gonna include it in our projections. That's why

they gave the conservative numbers. But as both of these

speakers have pointed out, they also highlighted -- you

know, the next report six years from now I think is gonna

say very different things. But they were very conservative

by design.

THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks very much.

Brian Taylor's the Dean of School of Ocean and Earth

Sciences and Technology. Sorry.

Another one for Chip: Will sea level rise affect

freshwater aquifers? If so, how, and what can be done?

DR. FLETCHER: I think this is a very important area

that we need a lot more research in. Initially it wilJ.

affect freshwater aquifers by causing them to rise. Those

that are already near the ground surface, we will lose that

amount of water because it will rise up to the ground

surface and become wetland. We also have what's known as a

caprock. A caprock is basically limestone around the south

shore of Oahu which is thought to present a barrier between

salt infiltration from the ocean into our fresh water

reserves under the island, within the island. And the

effectiveness of this caprock is poorly understood. As sea

level rises, the tendency for salt to diffuse out of the

ocean and into our groundwater resources is going to

increase. And so there are very unknown and potentially


60

[

1 important threats to the salinity, increases to the

2 salinity of our aquifer system.

3 At the same time, as we draw down our aquifer -- and

4 the Pearl Harbor aquifer has been declining for decades.

5 A5 we draw that down, we are pulling up salt from below it.

6 So -- and in fact, this problem's happening on Maui. The

7 'tao aquifer is actually -- the main freshwater resource

8 for the island of Maui is showing chlorinity and salinity

9 levels that are much higher over the last decade. There's

10 a big discussion going on on whether the state government

11 should take over management of the 'lao aquifer on Maui.

12 There's a whole riparian management issue throughout this

13 state that's very important.

14 Let me also just mention that -- you might think I'm

15 going off topic, but I'm not. We are pouring millions of

16 gallons a day of freshwater into the ocean through our

17 antiquated irrigation system left over from sugar cane

18 days. At the same time that we are drawing down our

19 freshwater aquifers, we are dumping millions of gallons of

20 freshwater through our irrigation system right into the

21 ocean. The water management in this state is a very big

22 issue, and it is tied to sea level rise.

23 THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks, Chip.

24 A question for Terry: How does the U.S.'s

25 contribution to climate change compare to other countries?

V


• 61

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

DR. SURLES: Well, is this because I was bashing the

administration or what during some of my presentation?

The reality is, is that the United States actually

puts a lot of money into research and technology

development related to new technologies that would

ameliorate emissions from fossil fuels. However, I agree

with Chip's earlier statement that the things like NASA

really needs to be focused on -- on the Earth. Basically

it's the Planet Earth that's certainly something that

Jim Hansen and NASA believes in.

The problem gets to the fact that our government, our

current government's policies, are completely disconnected

to what government scientists and government technology

developers are doing, and that spills over, for example,

the G8 conference at Rostock right now, that you really

need to start getting at some mandatory requirements that

the developed nations can agree to. There's just one

nation standing in the way, and it's us. And my view is --

it's certainly an opinion -- is that there's gonna be

additional monies for science and technology development in

any new administration. Whether it's Democrat or

Republican, I don't think it makes any difference.

I think the issue with NASA is a transitory thing that

will be rectified. And hopefully it's -- getting to one of

my final slides -- are public policies and the public

L .


62

1 policy instruments that we develop are going to be better

2 linked to the science and technology'we're doing. So

3 that's kind of a speech. The side-bar is, again, this

4 current administration was a disaster when it comes to any

5 international relations with climate change.

6 THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks, Terry.

7 I'dalsojustliketotakea second to recognize

8 Senator Norman Sakamoto who's come into the meeting.

9 Senator, thank you for being here.

10 Question for John: If greenhouse gas emissions source

11 is clarified by sector -- yeah, is categorized by sector,

12 canitbe further by county or island? Can it be broken

13 down?

14 DR. TANTLINGER; It can be. And that would take

15 significantly more analysis to be able to do that because

16 the way that the emissions were actually estimated is by

17 using sort of gross fuel consumption methods by different

18 technologies and sectors. So in some cases, some of the

19 sectors are easier to isolate by county, say, for the

20 utility, for example. And that's because there is more

21 precise and more specific data for that. But for some of

22 the other data, I mean, how could you necessarily apportion

23 aviation fuel to a particular county? I mean, these things

24 would have to be worked out, and I think it would require a

25 significant amount of more work.

\


63

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks, John.

Question, probably for Chip, but more likely for Brian

Taylor: Any effects on -- will climate change have anv

effects on ocean currents and jet streams?

DR. FLETCHER: Oh, wow. I can tell you that the ocean

current in our harbors will change because of sea level

rise, and that's something that we need to look at very

carefully. Hawai'i has a standing foodstock in its stores

of four days at any moment in time. We are rescued every

day by Young Brothers and Matson with barges of food that

come to us. And if we aren't able to properly dock those

barges, as sea level rises and the situation in our harbors

becomes more and more hazardous, this is a situation that

needs to be looked at more carefully.

As far as the jet stream, I can't really comment on

that. An atmospheric physicist would have to tell you

about that. And as far as the -- what was the other part?

Climate?

THE MODERATOR: It's --

DR. FLETCHER; Ocean currents. Yeah, actually, let me

just segue for just a few seconds.

The School of Ocean and Earth Sciences and Technology

has been funded, in fact, this year by the state

legislature to start on ocean observing program here in the

state of Hawai'i, and we have a coordinated group of


64

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

,10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

scientists and

dozen who are

oceanography,

at the marine

state of Hawai

next several y

change as well

deliver to the

the skills tha

there.

technicians

really going

improvements

ecosystem, un

'i. We are c

at SOEST numbering well over a

to be focusing on changes in

in community resiliency, looking

derstanding meteorology of the

oing to be studying over the

ears the potential impacts really of climate

as improving the products that we can

citizens of Hawai'i that are relevant to

t -- that's a good end to the sentence right

THE MODERATOR: Okay. We have four more questions.

and we have four more minutes, three more minutes.

And this is probably for perhaps Terry: Would the use

of biofuels, biodiesel, or other biofuels help improve the

climate change situation for Hawai'i, the greenhouse gas

emission situation?

DR. SURLES: Well, again, this is a life-cycle issue,

but I think overall you're really going to be replacing

petroleum products with -- with renewable energy products.

So the net effect is yes. I mean, the other societal

issues is -- are the question marks. I think the important

thing here is more that you're improving your energy

security if you're at least developing some of your

resources here in Hawai'i. However, with biofuels, there

are carbon emissions that are related to that life cycle.


65

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

so it's not a completely free lunch.


What is the impact -- what is the impact of seawater

air-conditioning on greenhouse gas emissions? Presumably

we're on climate change in general. First, it raises up

seawater temperature, but it reduces electric use. What

will the overall consequences be?

DR. SURLES: That's for me?

I mean, for any technologies that are going to reduce

electricity use -- and it's not -- I mean, I -- you know,

we're -- you know, it's not a particular technology.

There's a lot of new air-conditioning systems that are much

more efficient than a lot of existing systems. So whether

you're talking about seawater air-conditioning or anything

else, it's just a matter of -- the key thing is if you can

become more energy efficient, you're simply using less

electricity, less petroleum products; and you, therefore,

are going to be emitting less -- less greenhouse gases.

THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks.

We're not gonna get through all these questions

because I want to give people a break, but let's take one

more .

How do grasslands, rain forests, and the ocean compare

to rates of carbon capture per acre or square mile?

DR. SURLES: There's actually a very ac — there has


66

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

been a very active terrestrial sequestration program going

on both in the Department of Energy and also in the -- in

the California Energy Commission where these things are

cofunded. I -- you know, I guess you'd almost have to

refer to a Department of Energy Office of Health and

Environmental Research website to look at, you know, what

the latest results would be on that. I would not be aware

of why one would be better than another at this point.

THE MODERATOR: Good. Okay. We're gonna have to cut

off the questions here now if we want to get a break. It's

just about a minute after 10:15. We're going to come back

at 10:30. I wanted to ask you to help me thank the

panelists for great presentations.

(Whereupon, a recess was taken from 10:16 a.m. to

10:30 a.m.)

THE MODERATOR: Okay. We're gonna go ahead and get

started with the next panel, and this is Policy

Implications for Hawai'i.

I have one housekeeping issue for those of you who

haven't found the bathrooms. I think most of you know

where they are now.

The other housekeeping -- the other housekeeping issue

is Gary has asked us to have a show of hands of who -- to

see, give a count of how many people will be here for the

brown bag lunch.


67

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Jim Roumasset, why don't you get up there.

So let me -- let's just wait until a few more people

come in and sit down.

WOMAN IN AUDIENCE: Excuse me. What do you mean by be

here? I mean, I'd -- I mean, I'd love to get some lunch,

but I don't care where I get it from.

THE MODERATOR: Gary or Kaiulani, what are the

arrangements for lunch? People get their own.

MAN IN AUDIENCE: Bring in some pizzas.

MR, HASHIRO: Yes, for the lunchtime for today, we do

have planned a film showing in the Room 016, which is right

around the corner here. And it's a brown bag lunch, so you

bring your own lunch. And there is a snack shop that's

right at the corner here where you can get lunch if you

didn't bring any. We just wanted a show of hands to plan

the logistics for that room to make sure we can accommodate

everyone. Can I see a show of hands who plan to stay for

the lunchtime showing? Okay. Great. Thank you.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. I'd also like to recognize

Senator Clarence Nishihara and Gary Hooser who've also

joined us. I thank you. Senators, for being here.

As I said, the next panel is on Policy Implications

for Hawai'i. We have four presentations -- five:

Environmental Perspective from Henry Curtis from Life of

the Land; A Utility perspective from Robbie Aim; A


• 68

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Legislative Perspective from Representative Hermina Morita;

and An Economic Perspective from Jim Roumasset from the UH

Economic Research Organization, and then question and

answer. So we've got four presentations and then Q and A.

I will ask speakers to please limit themselves to 15

minutes, and I will also remind them and others that the

Power Points will be available on the HECO IRC website.

I also want to make note and thank Henry Curtis. This

is an historic day. This is Henry's first Power Point

presentation. It took me awhile, Henry, too. Not quite as

long as you. So without further adieu, I'll turn it over

to Henry Curtis.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR HAWAII

AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE

Mr, Henry C u r t i s , L i f e o f t h e Land

MR. CURTIS: Aloha. I think to start with this, money

is a good place to start any discussion on climate change

because there will be a great deal of money thrown at this

issue by corporations, by non-profits, by governments, by

foundations; and a lot of the money wiil come with strings,

and a lot of the money will be used for good things, and a

lot will be used for bad things. Follow the money, and it

reveals all things.


69

1 And then I also like the term "truthiness," which is

2 now part of the English language, because it refers to

3 doing things from your gut regardless of whether it has any

4 basis in reality. And one good example is from the public

5 opinion polls. In the early nineties throughout the U.S.

6 opinion polls showed that people were concerned with global

7 warming. They thought it was real. They thought it was a

8 threat. And the fossil fuel industry launched a campaign

9 in the mid nineties to say, no, there's just a lot of

10 skepticism about it. The science is out. It does not

11 really exist. It may exist. And it was through the Global

12 Climate Coalition which was funded heavily by Exxon and by

13 the Edison Electric Institute, which is the trade

14 organization for independently owned power utilities

15 throughout the country. And Sinclair Lewis -- you may have

16 seen this quote from films: It is difficult to get a man

17 to understand something when his job depends on him not

18 understanding it.

19 We've had a discussion by previous speakers about

20 Greenland and Antarctica, and it's important to look at it

21 as a percentage. If Greenland -- if 15 percent of

22 Greenland melts, the reef runway goes under water. And

23 what impact does that have on our tourism industry? What

24 happens if a third of Greenland melts and our downtown

25 business sector is under water?


70

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

The early message of the fossil fuel industry was, as

I said, what, climate change, it's way too uncertain. And

now, as the new message is, well, climate change is

important, but we have a future based on coal. Coal is

what exists throughout the United States. We have abundant

supplies, so how can we have the coal and avoid climate

change? We just have to somehow capture the 002. It's

never really been done before, but we'11 find all kinds of

uses for it, and everything will be okay.

And the biofuel industry has popped up. Initially

their message was we'11 offer an alternative to fossil

fuels. We are gonna find biological solutions that are

gonna solve our problem, and we don't -- and we'll go

beyond fossil fuels. Along the way though, it -- the

fossil fuel industry realized that agriculture is an

extremely fossil-fuel-intensive industry, and if you

increase it, there will be more opportunities for fossil

fuel. And therefore, the fossil fuel industry is now not

against biofuels because they don't see it as putting

themselves out of business. They see it as a way of

selling being green to the public and continuing their

record profits.

And self-reliant proponents are talking about a

variety of real alternatives, which include renewables,

includes efficiencies, includes green pricing and smart


71

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

meters. One of the things that we pointed out through

docket with the Public Utilities Commission where we are

arguing over proposed power plant by HECO that they wanted

to build in 2009 in Campbell Industrial Park is that if you

have a hundred acres of land, you can have a hundred acres

of biofuel crops or 1 acre of solar and 99 acres of food.

You get the same energy out of it. You just have a lot

more food in the second scenario.

So we're at a crossroads right now, and we have many

different paths. We can look at it as sort of a wheel, and

we can travel down many different spokes on the wheel. The

trouble is some of them are under water. There are many

different paths. Some of them work; some of them don't

work. The fossil fuel path is a denial of climate change.

The biofuels path is fossil fuels coded green. A true

portfolio involves a variety of renewables and

efficiencies.

Some paths take us to places we need to go, some of

the paths we got to stay away from, and some delay the day

of reckoning. And we only have to look at past examples in

Hawai'i to notice that Hawai'i, we have done -- gone down

some paths that are less than desirable. After all, the

mongoose was brought in to kill the rat, and now we have

both. Miconia was brought here as an ornamental because it

looked beautiful, and now it's rampaging through our


72

1 forests. And the koki frog, we simply didn't take enough

2 care to protect ourselves from invaslves. We felt that the

3 economic gain of plants were more important than finding

4 out what the plants came with. The problem with climate

5 change is we don't have a lot of time, and we can't be

6 walking down different wrong paths, especially those paths

7 that we know are wrong today but may be backed by money or

8 special interests.

9 Dr. Shimon Awerbuch is a former senior advisor for the

10 International Energy Agency. Unfortunately, he died in a

11 plane crash this year. He talked about how -- Integrated

12 Resource Planning procedures before the Public Utilities

13 Commissions around the country. We have talked about

14 renewables. We've talked about efficiencies. We've talked

15 about regulation. But we have shied away from talking

16 about what cost means, how you compare very different

17 scenarios with very different risk streams. And these

18 comparisons of alternatives have largely escaped any kind

19 of analysis. They're decided in the back rooms.

20 Externalities refers to things that are not included

21 within the price of a good. For example, if a power plant

22 produces electricity and the fumes wipe out a local school,

23 the impact to the school kids are not reflected in the

24 price of electricity. And one way that businesses have of

25 maximizing their profits is to shift their costs to


73

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

society. If you have a choice of one power plant that

emits low levels of greenhouse gases but costs more fof

electricity, you have another power plant that emits a lot

more greenhouse gases but has lower costs, you can go with

the one that has the greater impact on society but

minimizes your own costs. Businesses throughout the

country -- and I'm not singling out the electric industry,

but all kinds of businesses throughout the country find it

easier to maximize profits by shifting costs to consumers.

When you buy a good at a store, you don't buy -- the

company doesn't sell you a microwave and say, oh, by the

way, when you're done with it, bring it back to us, and

we'll dispose of it. The cost of disposing of it and what

happens with the landfill impacts are shared by society.

This slide is a question we asked the Consumer

Advocate during the power plant docket. And it's

significant because biodiesel, for example -- if you grow

palm oil in Indonesia and you grow it by destroying a

rainforest, burning through peat soil, growing palm oil,

turning it into biodiesel and bringing it to Hawai'i,

taxpayers pay a dollar a gallon subsidy. Imagine what

happens if we destroy rainforests throughout the world to

grow biodiesel for the United States to use in power

plants. Taxpayers pick up a huge load for destroying the

planet.


74

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

And so our -- should the Consumer Advocate be

reflective -- look at both the taxpayer and the ratepayer

impacts. And the Consumer Advocate, part of the old

thinking said no, we're concerned only with ratepayer

impacts. And part of our roll at Life of the Land is to

shift the focus to the new way of thinking. It says you

have to look at things holistically. Mother Earth wants to

know the total amount of greenhouse gases coming up into

the atmosphere.

And part of it is the boundaries and limitations of

any analysis. For example, Robbie Aim pointed out that

HECO has actually reduced their amount of carbon emissions

over the last 17 years, but they have increased the amount

of power they buy from others. Cars spew toxics out of the

tail pipe, and you often hear the analysis that this car

has less emissions out of the tail pipe than this other car

but not how much emissions comes from making the two cars

or how much electricity or how much greenhouse gases are

released in buiiding buildings as opposed to operating

them. Part of it is to look at the life-cycle analysis and

not limit it or segment it to one section.

Okay. We've talked about Indonesia. Brazil is

another example. The soil, the sugar production is not

occurring -- where they're making ethanol is not occurring

in the rainforest, but they're rapidly expanding


75

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

agricultural areas and forcing other crops to move into

their Amazon rainforest. So although the ethanol is not

directly contributing to greenhouse gas releases, it's

indirectly attributing to greenhouse gas releases.

One of the great areas of uncertainty deals with

agricultural lands. The last area tackled by the EPA on

water pollution is non-point source pollution. It just

runs off fields and out to seas, damaging reefs and water

systems. Greenhouse gas emissions are the same way. They

are the least understood when they come from agricultural

sources.

And we often hear two faulty assumptions: one, that

biofuels are carbon neutral; and two, the fossil fuels

should have a carbon tax of nothing. And it's nothing for

the carbon tax, is the way we currently plan electricity in

the IRP process on Maui, Kauai, the Big Island, and Oahu.

Economic input/output models are used by DBEDT and

economic planners to look at how -- when you go to the

store and buy something, how it ripples throughout the

entire economy. Obviously some of it is used to pay for

employees. Some of it goes to stockholders. Some of it

goes for rent. The store has to replace whatever you

bought. There are economic ripples throughout society,

And there are economic tables that say that a dollar

invested here will have two or three dollars of economic


m 76

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

activity. We need to

for greenhouse gases.

throughout

emissions

actually b

around the

begin thinking

how

the economy and

result from

2gun to loo

world who

The second is li

Dr. Surles mentioned

that

k at

are b

f e-cy

this .

an action

what the

action.

that, and

about the same thing

in one place ripples

total greenhouse

And the Japanese

there are other

eginning to think of this.

cle analysis, and I'm glad

This deals with looking

gas

have

playerrs

that

at a

product from the time you take it out of the ground, you

mine it, you process it, you make whatever you're doing,

and you landfill it or you recycle it.

And this example comes from Carnegie Mellon where they

analyzed the energy use and the toxic use from cars over

the lifetime of their vehicle. And you can look more at

this from the slide presentation when they're posted up.

This looks at how the life-cycle impacts of cars, electric

cars, depending on whether the electricity comes from coal,

liquefied natural gas, or hydro, because it's not just

making the car, but it's how you power the car if it comes

from electricity.

So I want to look at three different scenarios from

this kind of a context. The fossil fuel scenario, we take

fossil fuel from Indonesia or anywhere around the world,

and we refine it at Chevron or Tesoro. They're ranked 5th

and 8th, respectively, in toxic emissions in Hawai'i. Then


m 77

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the we burn it at a power plant. Kahe ranks number one in

state in emissions according to EPA.

Ethanol, we could make it from Kauai Ethanol. They

propose that each gallon of ethanol they make uses 4.18

pounds of imported Australian coal. And the coal accounts

for 60 percent of the energy content of the ethanol, but

the ethanol is 100 percent green under state law.

The third is ocean power using a combination of

seawater air-conditioning and ocean thermal energy

conversion. Then under state law the first is entirely

fossil fuel. The second and third are entirely renewable,

even though all three systems use fossil fuel, and all

three systems emit greenhouse gases.

So a life-cycle analysis would say, let's look at

number of the major processes that are used in each of

scenarios. And let's look at the greenhouse gases emitted

in each of those steps. And let's create a common unit:

tons of C02 equivalence per megawatt hour of electricity

produced or displaced over the life cycle of the facility

or process. By doing that, we have a basis for compari

the real impact from different scenarios.

I like this quote from Carl Sagan: Anything else

you're interested in is not going to happen if you can'

a

the

ng

breathe the air and drink the water. Don't sit this one

out. Do something. You are by accident of fate alive at


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

an absolutely critical moment in the history of our planet,

Remember during the iast -- all ice ages this planet has

ever had, nothing larger than a house cat has survived.

And this is how you can contact us for more information.

Thank you.

THE MODERATOR: Henry, great Power Point presentation

MR. CURTIS: Thank you.

THE MODERATOR; I'd also like to recognize Senator

Russell Kokubun who's joined us this morning.

The next speaker is Robbie Aim from Hawaiian Electric

Company. He's going to give us a utility perspective.

Robbie.

A UTILITY PERSPECTIVE

Mr. Robb ie Aim, Hawai ian E l e c t r i c Con^any, I n c .

MR. ALM: Thank you. Good morning. I want to begin

by saying that our board of directors and our management

team fully accept the challenge of global warming and our

role in the work that lies ahead. Specifically, the

company accepts the reality of global warming and the

responsibility we as a company have to take direct action

to reduce the contributions that electricity production

makes to global warming, which it clearly does.

We supported adoption of the greenhouse gas


m 79

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

legislation this year. We will assist the work of that

task force in any way we can. And we firmly believe that

the work that we all engage in in coming years lies -- in

that work lies a great opportunity for Hawai'i to reduce

and ultimately eliminate our dependence on overseas fossil

fuel sources. We must act expeditiously, and we must act

with skill in terms of how the greenhouse gas law will

impact our people and our way of life. We do not have to

chose between speedy action and skillful action because we

actually have the resources as a community to make this

happen.

First, as many have said, including John this morning

and including Maurice Kaya in the past, we need to continue

to do everything we're currently doing in terms of renewal

of energy and energy efficiency. Maurice and John have

both used the term a no-regret strategy. That is

absolutely true. There is no calculation on greenhouse

gases that does not make work in energy efficiency and

renewable energy valuable work. So we need to continue

that. We could do that at full speed while the task fprce

looks at other activities.

So as we look at the next few years, what things do we

perceive? Right now there are four wind farms on our

system. We expect between two to six more wind farms

joining our system in the coming years. We do expect to


80

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

place into service in 2009 a fully a biofueled power plant.

We expect to substitute biodiesel for petroleum diesel in

our Maui system, thus converting the core on the Maui

system from oil to renewable. We do expect an expansion of

geothermal on the Big Island, initially by 8 megawatts, and

later the discussion is of an additional 22 megawatts.

We believe there is substantial power available in the

forests on the Hamakua Coast, and we would hope to see that

potential realized. We expect to see an additional amount

of power derived from the waste stream on Oahu as Oahu

completes the bidding process to decide on the future

H-Power. We are also working with both ocean and current

energy developers to see what is available in our oceans

and to exploit that, and I think we are going to -- we need

to continually aggressively examine the opportunities for

energy storage such as to those that come from battery or

from pump hydro systems. There's literally hundreds of

megawatts of renewable energy that lie in our future.

Though it will not necessarily be easy, we must

overcome NIMBY-ism. We must accept alternative energy

resources in each of our communities. This is not somebody

else's problem. We must find beauty in the look of devices

that get us away from oil. And that really is on each of

us, and none of us should shirk from the task. When

renewable energy proposals are made, it is in everybody's


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

interest to speak up in favor of them.

Along with renewable energy generation, we have great

resources for the substitution of generation such as

seawater air-conditioning. There is a proposal that is

working its way through to install a good-sized facility in

downtown Honolulu. That project needs to go forward.

We've been supportive of it. We're signing up for it. We

have urged our clients to sign up for it. If you have any

influence on any building in the downtown area, urge them

to sign up for it. And then there are the critical energy

efficiency programs. From solar roof to rebates for energy

efficient equipment to the use of compact fluorescent

bulbs, we can all do our part in that action whether we're

talking about commercial enterprises or residences.

Secondly, beyond the direct action of our no-regrets

work with renewable energy and energy efficiency, we need

to look at general mitigation strategies such as

reforestation, the greening or regreening of Hawai'i. We

have a climate for it, and studies have suggested if you're

gonna plant a forest, you want to plant it in a place like

this, not in other places on the planet where it actually

may not be a plus; it may even be a negative. It will add

obviously to the quality of our life, to the attractiveness

of this place, but it should also add to our water

resources and have so many other benefits.


82

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

There are some uses, some greenhouse gas emitters we

are really going to struggle in dealing with. One of them

is jet fuel. There simply is no way for us as a state to

directly impact jet fuel, and yet our state's emission

count includes jet fuel. So if we're going to mitigate, we

can't just mitigate directly at the uses we have. We have

to figure out some broader mitigation strategy that can

lower our overall number.

Third, we need to take across-the-board action at all

greenhouse gas emissions. We must go after all emitters

and make them responsible for their actions. And in

Hawai'i one of the key areas, as the numbers you saw

earlier show, is transportation. Transportation simply

cannot be let off the hook. That one's going to require

work. It deals with our favorite automobiles, and that

means it involves each and every one of us. The number of

cars on this island, on all of our islands, is a real

challenge.

Our diesel fleet truck use is B20, a biodiesel blend.

A lot of the company cars we drive are very high mileage

Neons. We all have to think about the individual choices

we make in the cars we drive. You know, it would be great

to ask everybody in this room, who drives either a hybrid

or a high mileage vehicle or uses public transportation or

bikes or walks as a regular activity? That's great.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

That's about half the room. The day should come when every

single hand in this room goes up. The fact that we drive

some of the vehicles we do when most of us drive a few

miles a day at speeds which can never really exceed about

55 or 60, just because we don't have the ability to drive

at those speeds because of the traffic around us, suggests

that we're buying a lot of vehicles for which there' s

absolutely no use except perhaps our own ego.

We need to look at our home consumption of fossil

fuels. We are driven in this state more by residential use

than most places, so much of the answer must therefore lie

in our homes as well.

How do you change behavior? What combination of

education and incentives will make this happen? We believe

in education and have taken to the media with programs

designed it do exactly that, but much more needs to be

done. We are going to the schools beginning this fall to

work directly on the issue with young people. Harnessing

the power and commitment of the youth of Hawai'i -- excuse

me -- is one of our strongest assets. Not only is their

influence over parents and grandparents very strong, but if

they grow up with a different attitude towards energy use,

in other words, the absolute requirement to use less, those

habits will carry throughout their lives.

Four -- and here is the expressly skillful part -- we


• 84

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

need to design our law with great regard for how it impacts

us. One of the impacts of greenhouse gas regulation that

is clearly intentional is to raise the price of fossil fuel

uses in order to truly price their impact, as Henry noted,

but also to discourage their use.

How wili this impact different people? What we don't

want to do is balance this equation on the backs of poor

people. That's not good enough for us as a community, and

the law clearly requires that be examined. We need to

provide ways that the incentives for action that reduce our

fossil fuel reward those who reduce it in such a way as to

mitigate those additional costs. That sounds like a big

circle, but what we really need are that if you as an

individual choose to be energy smart, the incentive

structure created under our law should reward you so that

the impact to you of those rising costs is lessened. If

you choose not to live energy smart and to waste energy,

then the full weight of price increases should fall on you.

And that's a matter of design. That's a matter of design

of regulation. It's a matter of design of incentives. One

of the core responsibilities of the task force in that new

law is that work, and we should get on it with it.

Fifth, we want to ensure that the capital accumulated

by greenhouse gas regulation stays here. We are a capital

poor community, and we send already too much money offshore


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

to buy fuel and food. As we raise additional sums through

regulation, carbon tax, cap-and-trade, whatever system we

use is going to increase the amount of money we collect.

We need to make sure that that money is spent here, that it

is recirculated into our economy.

Let me give you one example. It's been said that if

we spend money on reforestation, it doesn't matter whether

we spend it here or in a forest halfway across the globe.

That's not true. We want, as we reforest, if that's one of

the things we choose to do, to buy our plants, hopefully

native plant, from Hawai'i nurseries, planted by Hawai'

people, maintained by Hawai'i people, greening our lands

and helping our water table. And we can do this, but

again, it takes deliberate action in the way we structure

our regulations and our incentive structures. But we want

the money we raise from people here to stay here in this

economy.

Sixth, and finally, we have a great advantage in the

work that lies ahead, and I think sometimes we forget this

one in this community, and we shouldn't in this case. We

have the University of Hawai'i. Some of the talent that's

on the programs today and that we will find in -- some of

that talent is on the program today. But we're gonna find

in the coming days and months that we actually have an

extraordinary, talented group of scientists and


• 86

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

professionals who are world leaders in their fields

gathered here in this room. Whether by accident or design,

some of the best minds on the planet to deal with issues of

greenhouse gas and what we should do, we actually already

have here. Outgoing UH Chancellor Denise Konan established

a Manoa Climate Commission. Look at the membership on that

list. It is -- it is an immensely talented group. And I

believe that if we find the right ways as a community to

call upon that talent, Hawai'i really can both lead the

world in the way we look at this and hopefully lead the

world in the way we approach it.

It is a great work that lies ahead of us. It is a

great work in terms.of the amount of work. It is also a

great work in terms of what we need to do. It's critical

for our way of life. It's critical for our very fragile

land, which Chip showed about as well as anybody can. It

is also work which we have the skill to accomplish. The

question, as always, with this kind of work is do we have

the will to action accomplish it. And that's very much

dependent on the people in the room. That's dependent on

each one of us individually, and we pledge our part in

doing this. Thank you.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks very much, Robbie.

We're gonna go ahead and move on to Representative

Mina Morita. As I said earlier, she's been a great


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

champion both of energy efficiency and renewable energy,

but also looking at the whole climate change issue. Sq a

legislative perspective from the Chair of the House

Committee on Energy and Environmental Protection. Mina!.

A LEGISLATIVE PERSPECTIVE

Representative Hermina M o r i t a Chair of the House Committee

on Energy and Environmental P r o t e c t i o n

REP. MORITA: Thank you. Good morning. My

presentation is really short. I was -- I wanted to be here

to field questions. It's really interesting because when I

first started looking at energy issues in 2001, I did not

agree with anything someone from HECO would be saying, and

I think it sounded like I wrote Robbie's speech.

But I think the biggest challenge from a legislative

perspective is climate change and energy policies are

long-term strategies, and how do we sustain the political

will to meet the policy objectives and implementation road

map to achieve the desired goals, because we're looking at

a road map that will take us 50 years or more out to get us

to where we want to go in Hawai'i.

And, you know, I think the legislative perspective

should also be the moral perspective. I remember when we

were discussing the bottle bill in 2001. There were three


•

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

students from Moloka'i -- and I tell this story

often 'cause it really was a turning point in my

legislative career. There were three students for Moloka'i

that were 10 and 11 years old. They were fifth and sixth

graders from Kualapuu School. And there was a room full of

adults. Mostly the room was crowded by lobbyists

representing national lobbying groups like the National

Soft Drink Association, Anheuser-Busch, just really, really

big names. And this ten-year-old girl got up, and she

looked everybody in the eye, and she said, when I grow up,

I don't want to be stuck with your problems. And, you

know, this is the issue. We're trying to change that. We

have an obligation, a moral obligation, as all of us

probably saw Inconvenient Truth, to future generations in

not leaving them with our problems. So -- so the political

will -- and the biggest challenge is how to sustain this

political will for moving in this direction.

The legislature took action this year, and thanks to

many of the legislators in this audience. Senator Hooser,

Senator Kokubun, and I think Senator Sakamoto worked in

getting some guidance dealing with greenhouse gas emissions

to the passing of House Bill 22 6. And the bill can be

broken down into several core sections. One is the policy

statement. And the policy statement by January 1st, 2023

should reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels. So


89

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

update the 1990 greenhouse gas emissions inventory; the

formation of a task force to see how to do this in the

smartest way possible; and then the rule-making process, to

implement meeting the policy objective.

And, you know, this -- this was a small step, a small

effort in the right direction. But if you look at all of

the other legislative issues that are -- that are tied linto

climate change — disaster preparedness, drought

mitigation, coastal preservation and addressing coastall

hazards and wastewater management or water management in

general -- you know, all of these are pending -- are

related to this very topic in some way. So, you know, it's

overwhelming. So it's, you know, always a constant

reminder of how to sustain the political will to move in

this direction in a really complicated subject matter.

You know, in -- a lot of this is linked to technology,

and a lot of it is linked to how do we deal with these

kinds of complex issues in a new way. Definitely what I we

see here emerging, it's not a new way, but it's sort of a

reaffirmation of the critical link between the University,

policy makers, and the private sector in resolving this

issue.

You know, on the national/international stage, we're

looking at new forms of governments that -- regional

management of emissions. We're looking at what will -|- a


• 90

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

global perspective of this problem and, you know, how

public policy is linked to research and development. You

know, so it's -- it's a little bit more complicated, and it

will take the legislative initiative to set out the policy

guidelines to get everybody moving in the same direction

and addressing these issues. But I think we keep moving in

the same direction by recognizing that this is the moral

issue of our generation, that -- that it will take unique

partnerships now to get everybody focused.

So as that ten-year-old from Moloka'i so wisely

advised all of us, that when they grow up, they don't want

to be stuck with our problems. Thank you.

THE MODERATOR; Thanks very much, Mina. I really

appreciate your sentiments on that.

The final speaker of this group is Dr. Jim Roumasset

from the UH Economic Research Organization and the

Department of Economics at the University. And Jim's gonna

give us — I guess it's an economist's perspective as

opposed to an economic perspective. Jim.

AN ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE

Dr. Jim Roumasset, UH Department of Economics & UHERO

DR. ROUMASSET: I'd like to thank HECO and the

Advisory Group for organizing this informative session, and


91

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

I wanted to acknowledge Dr. Burnett and Chris Wada sitting

in the third row there who helped me put together this

presentation.

I was asked to give an economic perspective, and since

economics is a policy science, it's natural for me to focus

on a couple of legislative initiatives. First one that

Representative Morita just mentioned is HB 226 to reduce

carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

By the way, I haven't heard anybody raise the issue of

why Hawai'i should be doing this. There will be no impact

within our lifetimes for what we do, and then there will be

no noticeable impact on what we do since we're such a tiny

part of the carbon emissions of the planet, and it's the

planet emissions that matter. So the case for taking

action is, one, a moral one. It's the right thing to do.

And -- if one believes that. And the other one is a matter

of leadership, that California decided to take the bull by

the horns and proceed with a -- this kind of a program so

maybe if Hawai'i does it and a few other states, we'11

start a movement in that direction.

These are the aspects of the bill that Representative

Morita already mentioned, the membership of the task force

and what they're assigned to do. Notice that one of the

requirements is that the strategy that the task force is to

come up with is to articulate cost-effective rules and


92

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

market-based instruments. That's gonna be important as we

move forward. It's the DOH that will implement this,

establish the limits, and monitor and enforce compliance

and work with DBEDT to update the inventory.

Now one issue is. What do we mean by update? I think

that's an important issue for the task force to consider,

and it's important that political considerations don't

become part of that process. There's a big temptation for

firms to get their 1990 benchmark moved up a little bit.

Now whenever you have a market-based incentive for

carbon reduction -- and we have the experience with Kyoto

Protocol and the leadership of the European Union and now

California that have gone in the cap-and-trade direction,

you really have two instruments to use that are market

based: tax or quantity.

The trouble with a carbon tax is if we're shooting for

1990 emission levels, we don't know what price to set; and

for this reason, most entities are going toward the

cap-and-trade approach. So what you do is set a quantity

for the identifiable sources of emissions, gradually reduce

that cap to the 1990 level, and let people trade. Those

that choose to emit more than their cap have to buy the

permits on the market. And the market sets the price, so

we don't have to know what it is in advance, since we don't

know.


• 93

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

I mentioned already how to do the inventory is one

important issue.

Now another issue is -- a choice to be made is do you

give away the initial allocation? One problem with that is

suppose that an industry has already reduced emissions

because of the desire to be more energy efficient. So are

you going to give them entitlements according to 1990

levels if they've already reduced below that? If you do,

they'll get windfall profits.

The reason that this cap-and-trade is advocated is

that we automatically get cost-effective compliance, that

you equalize marginal avoidance costs across firms. Now

the other option is -- which is politically more difficult,

very attractive for taxpayers, is to auction the permits,

and the revenue can be used to reduce other taxes. So if

we're gonna pay cap-and-trade with the regulated sources,

here's some of the regulated sources that you might think

of. One of the difficulties becomes with small business,

how small do you go? So there has to be a line, and

there's going to be some unregulated sources.

So now we have three ways of meeting the 1990 target.

One is reduce emissions among regulated sources. The other

is reduce emissions among unregulated sources. One of the

things that's done in the Kyoto Protocol is that a country

wishing to reduce or comply with its target can develop a


94

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

program with, say, China to reduce their emissions. Since

it has the same effect globally, it's efficient for them to

get credit for that. The administration of this kind of

program, of course, is a little more difficult. How do

you -- the benchmarking requirement, if it's already

difficult to benchmark emissions, this one is a little bit

more difficult.

Similarly, for -- if you want to have incentives to

offset credits -- to give offset credits for sequestration,

again, the benchmarking is very important. You want to

incentivize someone to plant a forest, go into renewable

forestry, sequester carbon that way, but you need to

benchmark. And there's kind of a tricky issue of what if

they were going to do that anyway? Should they have credit

for it or not? Right now the legislation -- the language

doesn't distinguish these three, so I'm not sure that would

be a topic further legislation, something for the task

force to take up.

Another legislative initiative I presume which is now

law is the renewable portfolio standards. We're trying to

read this the last week. It's not easy to make sense out

of it, but the requirement is that by 2020, 20 percent of

net electricity sales must be represented by renewable

energy, and the "represented" is tricky. So it turns out

that only 10 percent of the -- half of that 20 percent


95

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

comes from actual generation, for example, H-Power. The

rest can come from, quote, renewable savings, heat pumps,

solar water heaters and so on that replace energy-using

devices.

Now unlike the benchmarking system, it turns out liere

that you can count solar water heaters, for example, that

were already installed 20 years ago as part of the

compliance. So by 2010 you have to do half — you get

halfway there, so only 5 percent from generation. And

we're actually already there, it looks like; that renewable

generation of electricity is around 6 percent, and if

renewable savings of the type I just described is at least

4 percent, then we've already made the target. And if the

initiatives that Robbie Aim was talking about go through,

we'll actually be quite ahead of the target.

Now what an economist would say as opposed to

mandating reforms is efficiency pricing, and this has been

already mentioned. One technique is that you want to

incentivize individuals by charging the marginal costs of

generation and transmission to the marginal units. If they

are facing that marginal costs, then they'll be

incentivlzed to do renewable generation to some extent

The other thing I wanted to throw in is just have

transparent billing. I think both the -- your water bill

and your electricity bill are kind of hard to figure out so


97

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

or something, then you say, well, it's okay to turn my

refrigerator off. Now there's various ways to do this and

with various appliances. One way is with a flat rebate.

You just get $3 per month if you sign up for this program

for a water heater, $5 for -- if you have central air in

Mililani, you can sign up for that. It's a little bit

uncertain from the consumer point of view.

Another option is to give them proportional rebate at

either preset prices, or if you really went the full

economic route, you would give them the peak-load prices

that actually reflect the -- for example, the generator

being off line. You could call it emergency pricing. That

would be more attractive for the consumer and incentivize

more energy-saving technology and also generate profits

that allow the utility to do what we call block pricing.

That is, the important thing for incentives is that this

second block, that the marginal unit you're buying is equal

to the full marginal cost. Now for lower units it's okay

to charge less. That won't have any problems for

incentives. So this is a convenient way when a utility is

generating excess profits without causing a hardship to

consumers and still facing them with the full incentives.

We mentioned net metering. There's a couple of

interesting features about this. One of them is when you

have PV for your house and you choose to stay on the grid.


98

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

so your meter — and you elect the option of net metering,

your meter runs backwards when you're putting electricity

into the system. One kind of limitation of this is if you

have, for example, a September 30th ending date for your

so-called reconciliation period and you generated a lot of

surplus in the summer because of a lot of sunshine and you

were careful about the air-conditioner, then you would end

up with a surplus that you don't get to bank. So it's

little bit of a disincentive in the system.

And then just to mention the monthly fixed customer

charge, from economic point of view should really be the

variable costs of things like reading the meter and

billing, and this might vary from consumer to consumer.

Seven dollars would seem to be reasonable if you lived on

Hawai'i Loa ridge, but if you're in Klmberiy's apartment

with -- where the -- couple of guys can read the meters in

five minutes for 15 units, then you're charging $105. It's

not clear that's appropriate, especially for low income and

middle income.

So I just wanted to end with the economic perspective

of Adam Smith, which is, you have to be careful about

unfunded mandates even when the -- you're trying to be

even when you have good intentions. He said, the man of

system is enamored with the supposed beauty of his own

ideal plan. He seems to imagine that he can arrange the


99

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

different members of a great society with as much ease as

the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chessboard.

He does not consider that in the great chessboard of human

society, every single piece has a principle of motion of

its own altogether different from that which the

legislature might choose to impress upon it.

So I think in -- with reference to the initiatives we

discussed, the 3185 is largely redundant. And that's

actually good news with unfunded mandates because the bad

news is you often get unintended consequences and waste and

excess taxpayer revenues. I think in the case of 2025, the

devil's in the details, and we'll have to see if the task

force does an adequate job. If they do, then I think that

can be useful legislation. So thank you very much.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks very much, Jim.

And I really want to thank the panelists. We're a

minute ahead of schedule here so far. We're going to take

that minute and give our court reporter a chance to stand

up and stretch, and then we're going to take questions, and

Leo and the others are -- Gary's over there collecting the

green sheets. And as those of you who know, it's a first

come, first served basis. These are the ones that were

leftover from last time.

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)


100

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR HAWAII

Question and Answer S e s s i o n

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Actually, one question for

Henry came in before he spoke, so -- somebody got a look at

his Power Point, I guess.

We've always thought of the ocean as a carbon sinli.

Now we're told acidification of the ocean is affecting

corals and the life in the ocean. Comments, please?

Henry.

MR. CURTIS: Both the ocean and soil can act as either

a sink or a source, and we have to look at the total impact

if we are to make meaningful change.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Henry.

This is for Jim Roumasset. If good economics have

energized the depletion of natural sources, why would

current economic theory which excludes life-cycle or

energy-efficient models solve any of the environmental

problems, solve any environmental problems?

DR. ROUMASSET: Thank you, Tom.

Good economics means what we call looking at the

environomy. The economy is embedded in nature. If you

look at the full system, then you need to account for the

externalities that Henry was mentioning before. And the


101

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

job of regulation is to make individuals and firms face the

true costs of their action, including depleting natural

capital and including pollution. So the theory is not a

problem. Sometimes measurement is one of the difficulties.

That -- there's been a lot of advancement, for example, on

the damage costs of global warming. And certainly we've

been working on the cost of sulfur for a lot longer. So it

is possible to expand a set of incentives to have an

efficient system.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Jim.

This is for Robbie regarding his remark encouraging

using the law to keep the money -- regulations to keep the

money here in Hawai'i. If the problem we face is global

warming, shouldn't we allow any money raised through

regulation -- should we allow it to flow to the areas in

our world where the benefits are the most efficient and

effective instead of to artificially keep the money here if

they're not the best to help solve the problem, the global

problem? This sounds like another economist.

MR. ALM: You know, that's a -- that's a legitimate

point of view. I think the challenge that a number of us

see in Hawai'i is the way our economic structure is anyway,

we have a very significant have/have-not problem as it is

already. And we're going to, in one form or another, add

on to that taxes or -- or permitting costs for -- for


102

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

carbon, which are gonna raise prices even higher. I think

the equation then becomes even more difficult for people

who are struggling to survive in the economy as it is. So

the notion of trying to ensure that the money fiows back

in, in both incentives to people to take positive action,

but also into the economy in the form of jobs or other

kinds of activities here, has other -- has other value.

So, I mean, it's a legitimate choice to say, send it

anywhere you want on the planet. I just struggle with the

reality of what this state's challenges are in greenhouse

gases but also in the way our economy is structured, in the

types of jobs we have, in the possibilities for new

industries or businesses that are related to doing the

right thing by our planet and desiring that that money stay

here. So, you know, I understand the other view. I just

feel strongly that we have -- we have people to take care

of here and that we should make that a priority.

THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks, Robbie.

This is for either Mina or for Jim. It's a little bit

off the subject, but not entirely. Do you support

pay-at-the-pump with basic no-fault insurance included in

the cost of gasoline? It would be revenue neutral to the

commuter and promote fossil-efficient cars with greater use

of mass transit. It's basically taking care of the

no-fault problem and increasing the cost of gasoline so


103

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

people drive less.

DR. ROUMASSET: Yeah, I mean, pricing at the pump is

one way to -- certainly the -- for pricing carbon, you

can -- suppose you have a cap-and-trade system. Then the

refiner, let's say, at the refining level or at the

wholesaling level, they're going to be paying for those

carbon permits which is going to get into the price anyway.

So actually, if you had cap-and-trade, it would be more

effective to do it at the larger level.

If you have a tax system and you're going after

carbon, then taxing at the pump is fine. That doesn't

really -- it's not a very effective instrument for

congestion because somebody driving at peak time periods is

causing a lot more social cost than somebody driving at

non-peak periods. So we need probably a different

instrument for that one.

THE MODERATOR: Mina, you want to take that one?

REP. MORITA: I think this has something to do -- I

was the only legislator that voted against the -- the

general excise tax on gasoline bill. I think, you know,

pay-at-the-pump serves an important model that we should be

looking at in trying to deal with energy policies and

environmental issues. So it shouldn't be overlooked, and,

you know, I would support looking at pay-at-the-pump as a

mechanism to address these kinds of issues.


104

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Mina.

Another question for Robbie. If we can find an

effective means of carbon sequestration of existing power

plants -- and this should probably go to Carlito who's

left — will the PUC allow HECO and the IRC to pass that

cost of implementation on to the ratepayers?

MR. ALM: The basic regulatory structure of the state

passes on all legitimate costs to ratepayers. So, I mean,

that portion of it is probably easier to answer. You Icnow,

the work is really being done to figure out ways to

capture, to sequester carbon, or to make use of it. You

know, the question earlier about whether we can either use

ocean sequestration -- the possibilities for land

sequestration here in Hawai'i are obviously very

different -- you know, we're not sending it into our

aquifers -- than on mainland states when they're sending it

into salt caverns or other kinds of formations.

But, you know, you're going to hear some about it

later today. I mean, you know, one of the possibilities

that's really being looked at is the use of that carbon as

part of the growth of, say, marine algae; that carbon is --

the C02 is a growth medium for marine algae. So could you

take -- could you capture it off our stack and essentially

inject it into a bed of algae and then be able to use the

biodiesel that came out of that back into our plant. I


105

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

would certainly think if that equation was created that the

Public Utilities Commission would support our doing it for

a whole variety of reasons, I mean, because it would

address a lot of the issues we're talking about today but

also address a number of others.

THE MODERATOR; Okay. Thanks, Robbie.

This is for Mina Morita. Can Hawai'i get legislation

passed to promote rebates to the consumer so that Hawai'i

roofs, both residential and commercial, have solar panels

for electricity generation to the level achieved in

Germany? I don't know what that level is, but --

REP. MORITA: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we

already authorized the PUC to deal with these kinds of

issues. I think the issue of these rebates are better

addressed at the regulatory level than the legislative

level.

THE MODERATOR: Good. Thanks, Mina.

Another question for any or all: How might a carbon

tax affect tourism in Hawai'i, the number of arrivals,

length of stay, visitor spending, isle visitation packets?

Anybody want to take a shot that one?

MR. CURTIS: First, the carbon tax would not apply to

the flight over, which is under federal regulation. It

would only apply to what happens within the state. Second,

the whole idea is to reduce our use of fossil fuels. If we


106

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

invent a strategy that maintains our use or increases our

use, we're going backwards, or forwards faster to climate

change.

MR. ALM: I think at one level the answer would be

that -- and I don't disagree with Henry. The issue is you

would add on to the cost of products, presumably including

jet fuel sold here, whatever cost you wanted to associate

with the carbon in that jet fuel, however you did it. You

know, it could be passed on at the refinery level, at the

cap-and'trade system, or even in a carbon tax. So if you

had a jet fuel price increase, will that affect tourism?

That's a question for someone else to answer, but that s

the essence of -- the question is, the Hawai'i vacation may

become more expensive. On the other hand, you know, this

is a worldwide issue, and hopefully the taxes or the prices

on carbon will rise worldwide, and so hopefully it isn t a

marginal decision made there between two places.

THE MODERATOR: Good.

Another question for Robbie. I think he answered this

one in his presentation, but is there any hope of Oahu

getting -- no, he didn't say this. Is there any hope of

Oahu getting a majority of its power from renewable sources

in the foreseeable future?

MR. ALM: I think the answer to that is -- is yes.

And back to something I said, it's gonna require that a lot


107

1 of us get on board. There are definitely wind resources on

2 this island. They are on the -- clearly on the North Shore

3 and the Kahuku area and around the corner, and that's --

4 it's the upper windward side that is at this point our wind

5 resource. There are ocean resources, you know, seawater

6 air. Most of the OTEC proposals we've ever heard of are

7 off Kahe, cabled onto the islands. You know, we'll have --

8 we'll continue to have this argument, but we do think that

9 we can substitute biodiesel or biofuel crops for petroleum

10 and that that's a plus. Certainly it counts today.

11 There's significant savings still to be achieved by

12 solar roofing, by energy efficiency. You know, per capita

13 we're the best solar roof state in the United States, and

14 we should feel very proud of that. But the reality is it's

15 still one in four single homes, and it should be half of

16 all single-family and single residence or three-quarters or

17 eventually every home or nearly every home. So there's

18 lots of room to add that to the equation.

19 You know, so you start to add up the ocean, the wind,

20 the fuel-switching, the garbage-to-energy increases, yes, I

21 think that an awful lot of Oahu can get there, but we're

22 gonna have to say yes. We're gonna have to say yes to

23 those kinds of facilities in our neighborhood. We're gonna

24 have to say yes to -- yes to the look and feel and -- and

25 whatever consequences or however you want to describe


108

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the -- the impacts of some of our renewable resources, that

we need to be okay with it. We need to say to ourselves,

whether or not you think a windmill is the most beautiful

thing in the world, it's more beautiful than a barrel pf

oil.

You know, and we need to find the right equations for

ourselves as a community. We do value beauty here. We

clearly value natural beauty. We clearly are very

aesthetically interested people. We always have been.

think it's spectacular that we have no billboards in

Hawai'i. I mean, there's been more attention paid probably

in Hawai'i to aesthetics than most places. Having sale

that, you know, we need to also say to ourselves that our

sense of aesthetics needs to incorporate a sense of what

the future of the planet is and that things that, you know,

we might feel a little uncomfortable with become far

different if you -- if you calculate that in.

We had a similar experience to -- to the one that Mina

talked about. When we were looking at the wind farm on the

west side of Oahu, the strongest proponents for it were the

students at Nanakuli High School. And part of the reason

they were strong proponents for it is they said, you know,

much like what Nina said, is from the future's standpoint,

they look just fine to us.



109

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Another one for Mina; Why did the legislature allow

the redefining of renewable energy to include energy

efficiency instead of real renewable energy, which most

people interpret as generation from wind, solar, ocean,

et cetera? Are there plans to fix the definition?

REP. MORITA: I think, you know, we have to look at --

you know, it's a real balancing act, and nothing is set in

stone. But what was realistic to take us out into the

future, the near future, as we work on these kinds of

issues, definitely there are some really good technology

that would fall more on the efficiency side than would fall

on the renewable side that we wanted to incorporate. And

so, you know, legislation is not set in stone, but this was

a good beginning for us to meet the challenges that are

unique to Hawai'i.

And again, some of the challenges that are unique to

Hawai'i is we have really small grid systems, so, you know,

we have to look at that interaction of each island as a --

really almost a separate utility and that uniqueness of the

state. You know, these kinds of technological issues might

be easier to be solved on the mainland. So, you know, we

have to be flexible in -- in crafting the RPS renewable

portfolio legislation. But again, it's not like it's set

in stone, but this is the first good step for us to get in

the right direction.


110

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Mina.

Question for Robbie: To encourage conservation, will

HECO calculate and print the — I guess it's the user's

carbon footprint, the ratepayer's carbon footprint? If

not, why not?

MR. ALM: Well, we -- excuse me. Could you --

THE MODERATOR: I think the question is -- Doc Barrie,

correct me if I'm wrong. I think this was asking if HECO

would be willing to calculate the carbon footprint of its

ratepayers in terms of doing an audit. Is that the

question, Doctor?

DR. BARRIE: Printed on the bill.

THE MODERATOR: Oh, printed on the bill.

MR. ALM: We could clearly calculate our C02

emissions. We do anyway. We can clearly calculate the

amount of fuel we use. We can calculate a variety of ways.

The legislature asked us, for example, to print on your

bill the amount of energy that's renewable versus that

which comes from fossil fuel sources, so we do that right

now once a year. So yes, we can calculate and put on your

bill a variety of things.

It's our intent though to -- based on some experience

we've had with the folks in West Oahu to whom we give a

series of reports annually at their insistence, to begin to

publish a lot more about the numbers on our system. You


Ill

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

know, what's the footprint of our -- of our own units?

What's the footprint of the IPPs, the independent power

producers, because I think we're going to have a number of

critical decisions to make as a community in the coming

years about various kinds of resources and, you know, what

the system looks like. So I think we have to be

increasingly transparent in what the impacts of particular

parts of the system are.

But I think we're also all joining registries. The

State of Hawaii is, has already made that commitment. So

facilities are going to increasingly around the country

essentially be registered, certainly by their greenhouse

gas components. And that's -- that's a good thing. I

mean, let's get this information on the table and have it

as part of the discussion.


This one's for Jim. For C02 emissions, why can't you

regulate all sources through an upstream cap-and-trade

policy that controls the distribution of fossil fuels?

DR. ROUMASSET: Cap-and-trade automatically does that.

You don't want to have double counting. So if you're doing

those sources I mentioned and -- for example, you have --

you have a cap for the refiners and the -- anybody that

brings in refined product, so the cap is there. And then

you don't want to put it anywhere else. Otherwise that


112

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

would be double counting just for the fossil fuel. So

that's the kind of principle.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks, Jim.

This one's for Henry. The head of NASA says climate

change can be beneficial. Is this the new fossil fuel

propaganda?

MR. CURTIS: It certainly sounds that way.

I want to also make one other comment. If you look at

only fossil fuel, you do not count, for example, releases

from soil when you grow things. A world-famous soil expert

said that currently soil could account for one-third of the

total amount of 002 released equivalence as all fossil fuel

worldwide. So soil could act as a sink or a source. But

if you don't look at other factors besides just the fossil

fuel component, you'11 get the wrong answer.

THE MODERATOR; Good. Thanks, Henry.

This is a long one. I'm not sure I can read the

handwriting. If everything is a top priority -- this is

for Robbie. If everything is a top priority, nothing is.

If greenhouse gas, slash, climate change is the problem,

shouldn't that remain the focus of the regulatory scheme,

of regulatory schemes? It's a laudable goal to minimize

local economic and consumer benefits by forcing

renewables -- forcing revenues from carbon taxes or other

regulatory fees to protect local jobs, to address social


113

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

issues. However, as a global problem with grave local

impacts in sea level rising, how can not counting

sequestration and climate credits elsewhere be counted --

be encouraged.

MR. ALM; Again, I don't have any problem with the --

the formulation that the question-writer had. I just think

we can do better than that. You know, we can do both. We

can both help this planet and attend to our people. And

I -- I don't see why we should start out with the notion

that we should ignore what its impacts are to Hawai'i. You

know, maybe -- you know, maybe you wind up there, but why

wouldn't you in the attempt to design it see if you can't

do two-fer or three-fer or four-fer-one and do both?

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Robbie.

That's the end of the questions from this particular

round. And the logistics of getting people from last

round -- since some of them have left, I can't give those

to them. But I want to thank -- I want to ask you to help

me thank these speakers for both their presentations as

well as for the -- as well as for the overhead and the

questions. And also I want to thank all the speakers from

this morning.

(Whereupon, the luncheon recess was taken from

11:51 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.)

THE MODERATOR; I think we better get started. We


114

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

have two panels this afternoon. The first one, the first

panel this afternoon is Options and Strategies for

Controlling Greenhouse Gas Emissions. We have five

speakers and a question-and-answer session.

I'd just like to ask the speakers, some of whom

couldn't make it this morning -- we have a court recorder

here, and we'd ask you to speak slowly and articulate so

she can hear it. And then I'd also like to ask folks to

try to stay to the 15 minutes because we've got a lot to

get through this afternoon.

I hope those of you who saw the movie enjoyed it.

was involved with those folks before they made that, jiist

before they made that movie.

The speakers this afternoon, we have Dave Rezachek

with the Hawaii Renewable Energy Association. He's gonna

talk about renewable energy. And Brian Kealoha, he's with

Energy Industries. His boss is actually active on the

forum and chairs one of our committees. Brian's going to

talk about energy efficiency. Shanah Trevenna from the

Sustainable Saunders program at the University of Hawai'i,

she'll be joining us, and she's going to talk about what

each of us can do. I think this is sort of a

50-ways-to-save-the~planet presentation. Jeff Mikulina

from Sierra Club, who's also been involved with us on the

forum, is going to talk about From Belief to Behavior;


115

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Motivating Change, which was something that was talked

about a little bit this morning. And then Barry Raleigh is

going to talk about Feedstock for the Future, and he's

talking about renewable energy and algae.

So with that, David, why don't you go ahead and lead

off.

OPTIONS AND STRATEGIES FOR CONTROLLING GHG EMISSIONS

RENEWABLE ENERGY

Dr. Dave Rezache)c, Hawaii Renewable Energy Association

DR. REZACHEK: Okay. Good afternoon. I'm filling in

this afternoon for Warren Bolimeier who's the president of

HREA. I'm actually with Hawai'i -- Honolulu Seawater

Air-Conditioning, so you'll see a little slight focus on

seawater air-conditioning in this presentation.

Okay, Basically what I want to do is look at

renewable energy, what it is, why it's needed, the

different types of resources that we have in the state and

also on Oahu, the development potential on Oahu as I see

it, status of the various conversion technologies,

something called learning curve analysis, and then, as

Henry mentioned and a couple other speakers, life-cycle

energy and greenhouse gas emissions benefits and be looking

at a source to end use pathway analysis. And then finally.


116

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

I'll show a little comparison of the benefits of various

renewable energy technologies.

Okay. Well, what is renewable energy? I'm not a big

fan of the renewable energy definition in the statute, so I

prefer the definition that you see here. It's an energy

derived from resources that are regenerative or for al'.

practical purposes cannot be depleted.

And why do we want to use renewable energy? Well,

it's abundant, and, as you'11 see, it's very diverse.

Hawai'i's got a lot of different types of renewable energy

resources. It's available locally, which is very

important; reduces the need for fossil fuels; and then the

topic of this hearing is that it reduces greenhouse gas and

other emissions.

These are the types of renewable energy resources that

are available in the state; combined biomass and biofuels

in one category; geothermal, and a lot of you may not know

it, but even Oahu has some geothermal resources, a lower

temperature resource, but there is some resource here;

hydroelectric, Oahu doesn't have much of this, but the ire's

a small amount; municipal solid waste, Oahu's got a lot of

this and a lot of landfill gas; ocean thermal, which

consists of both sea water air-conditioning and OTEC, ocean

thermal energy conversion; and solar, which is electric,

there's two forms of that, electric as a photovoltaic, and


117

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

then there's thermal, which could either be water heating

or some sort of process heat; and then there's wave energy

and wind energy.

A number of factors affect the development of global

energy anywhere you go. These include resource

availability. You have to look at two aspects of that: a

spatial characteristic, where is it available; and a

temporal characteristic, when it is available. For

instance, solar is available all over the state, but it's

not available in the same quantities in different areas.

There are cloudy areas that have a lot less solar, and

there's sunny areas that have a lot more solar. And then

temporal, and again, if you look at solar, that's available

during the day but not during the night whereas something

like ocean thermal energy conversion, which is also a solar

technology, is also available 24 hours a day.

So it's very important to look at when that renewable

energy resource is available; then resource intensity, and

again, I mentioned solar that -- for instance, maybe Hilo

you don't have the intensity that you have in the Ewa plane

here; and then there's the status of the conversion

technology. Some of these technologies are mature, and

some are early in the development stage; and then we have

to look at cost. What is the current cost of each of these

technologies and then what is the future cost? And so I'll


118

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

get into a little something called learning curve analysis

which shows how costs reduce as technology becomes more

developed.

We have to look at the status of the conversion

technologies. Some of these are in just the research stage

right now. They're not that well developed. Some are in

the demonstration. I would guess -- characterize wave

energy as being in the demonstration stage. There are some

small wave power plants throughout the world, some even in

the megawatt range, but it's not largely developed, anc

it's not widespread. And then there are other technologies

that are commercially availability; for instance, wind or

sea water air-conditioning or solar thermal in the form of

solar water heating.

Why do we need to look at learning curves? Well,

learning curves or learn-by-doing curves or experience

curves provide a means for assessing future potential cost

reductions in a particular technology. A technology

learning curve defines the present unit cost of a given

technology as a function in a cumulative production. And I

show an equation there, and that's basically how it's laid

out.

This shows some learning curves for typical consumer

products. And basically what it shows, that -- for

instance, cellular phones or microwave ovens, the initial


119

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

costs of those technologies was very high. There were very

few of them. They had to recapture their development

costs- There wasn't a widespread market for them. But as

the market developed and as the number of units increased

through production and demand, those costs dropped rapidly.

You can see a cellular phone in the late eighties was very,

very expensive. Then when you get into the late nineties,

it's dropped by a couple orders of magnitude in cost.

You can get a similar type of learning curve for

renewable energy technologies, and what I've shown here is

photovoltaics. Now the difference between the curve I

showed just before and this curve is that this curve a log

basis - So you can see that instead of a linear scale on

the left-hand side, we have a log scale. So back in, say,

1976 the cost of 1 watt of photovoltaics is maybe 70 or 80

dollars a watt. When we get to 2001, it's dropped down to

about six or seven dollars. And these costs continue to

drop as you -- the efficiency of the technology increases

and the demand for the technology and the amount of

installed units of that particular technology increase.

And as you can see, this curve is a pretty straight line so

that there's been continuous increases in costs on PV

system for at least the last 30 years and substantial --

and that's because there's much more installed capacity,

and a lot of work has been done in manufacturing


120

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

capabilities, efficiency in the processes, that type of

thing.

You can see there's a learning curve here. Basically

for photovoltaics, every time you double the amount of

installed capacity, you reduce the cost by about 20 to 30

percent. So this shows a grad -- or a continual decrease

in cost with increase in the amount that's installed.

Now if you take these learning curves and we look at

them, which is the upper set of lines here -- and this

shows how, for instance, if you had a residential PV system

on Kauai, a 2 kilowatt system, which is a typical size

system, right now it might cost you 69 cents per kilowatt

hour for that system; but as the technology advances, that

cost continually drops until -- like the year 2017, you

might be down to 33 cents. At the same time, we're having

an increase in utility costs primarily because of the cost

of oil. So on Kauai you might have a 31 cents or 30 cents

per kilowatt hour cost now, so you can see that the cost of

electricity from PV is about twice what it is replacing.

So that's not a good economic situation. It doesn't make

much sense to do PV unless you can narrow that gap through

either tax credits or some other incentive.

But as you see, as we go along and the cost of energy

goes up and the cost of the technology goes down, there's a

point where they cross over. There's three curves on each


121

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

of these things, and one is -- the center one is probably

the average cost, and the upper one is the higher rate of

decrease or the higher rate of increase. And so they cross

in the year 2012. The convention here is the years you see

on the bottom are the end of the year. So sometime in 2012

to 2015, which is these two intersection points, you'll get

grid parity on PV systems, residential PV systems on Kauai,

meaning that at that point in time you won't need any

subsidies. The cost of electricity will be sufficient to

pay for the system.

This shows a similar picture on a small scale utility.

This is a 5 megawatt system. And you can see that sometime

in the 2012 to 2016 time frame you get grid parity on Oahu.

And this assumes that all these things continue at the same

level. But it shows that PV has got a great potential, but

that potential may be five to ten years down the road. And

I'll show you why I think that's important for everybody to

use this type of analysis on all renewable technologies.

The reason that is, is we only have a limited amount

of money that we can devote to development or incentivize

different renewable energy technologies. So what makes the

most sense is to put that money into technologies that have

the most near-term potential and use some of the money for

development of those other technologies but not, for

instance, put all of our money into, say, PV or any single


122

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

technology that may not be ready yet. So you need to lay

out a program of where you get the most bang for the buck

based on where the technology is and how much you need to

incentivize it.

So I kind of laid out a system here that shows the

technologies that I believe are mid term, near term, and

long term. Solar thermal's already cost effective. Wind

is cost effective. Seawater air-conditioning are all cpost

effective. And biomass in the form of municipal solid

waste is cost effective. There may be some possibilities

of doing coal firing of biomass with the coal in the

current AES power plant. And then biofuels, I'm not sure

that they're cost effective, but they're getting a great

deal of subsidized -- subsidies.

In the mid term, as I said earlier, wave is really in

kind of a pilot or demonstration phase, but in five to ten

years it should be in a commercial stage and close to cost

effective. So it would be a technology to shoot for in

that mid term.

Residential intertied -- utility intertied PV on

neighbor islands -- I showed the case of the PV in Kauai --

would be grid parity somewhere in the 2013, 2015 area;

commercial scale PV, again, the Oahu example; and then

smaller OTEC plant, ocean thermal energy conversion, 5 to

10 megawatts; in the long term, a 100 megawatt OTEC,


123

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

perhaps residential utility intertied PV on Oahu or utility

scale PV on Oahu.

So what does that mean? It means that if you select

the right technologies and you select them at the right

time that you can do it in a very cost-effective manner.

And this is just one possible layout of potential --

renewable energy potential on Oahu. And I think you can

see OTEC is number one because it's a base load power

plant, provides 24-hour-a-day electricity; the same as the

municipal solid waste; then seawater air-conditioning which

has enormous potential for Oahu. My company, Honoiuiu

Seawater, is putting in a 25,000 ton system for downtown

Honolulu. We think there's at least four systems on Oahu

alone. Then solar thermal, right now there's probably 60

— 50 -- 60,000 systems on Oahu, 50,000 maybe. You should

double that number of systems by 2020. And then the wind,

Oahu, we don't have sufficient land to have a really large

system. So maybe you can only develop 50 megawatts in the

North Shore. Wave, again, because of the time it's gonna

take to develop that technology by 2020, we may have 25

megawatts. And then PV, because of the cost now and the

time between now and the time that it develops as a grid

parity, maybe 20 megawatts. But as you can see, we're able

to meet the RPS standard for Oahu just with these

technologies by 2020 easily. And this doesn't include some


124

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

of the other technologies that they include in that, energy

efficiency and some of the other nonrenewable type things

that are listed as renewables.

As Henry said earlier, in order to see what the impact

is of these different technologies, we have to look at

life-cycle analysis, energy and greenhouse gas emissions.

We have to look at from-the-cradle-to-the-grave type

approach for each of these technologies. And we can do

this through pathway analysis. You can determine what the

total fossil fuel energy displacement and greenhouse gas

emissions reductions of a particular energy system is from

the fuel source to the end use.

So we've done this system -- or we've done this

analysis with seawater air-conditioning. And what you

looked at is you look at crude oil at the source, meaning

at the well head. And then you look at the efficiency

losses throughout that chain. And, for instance, here we

can show the production of that crude oil and the

shipping -- or at least the production of the oil. It

takes some energy to produce the oil, to pump it out of the

ground, whatever. That might be 90 and a half percent

efficient. And then you need to ship that to Oahu, and

that might be 98 percent efficient. Then you need to

refine that into the products that you use, whether it's

residual fuel oil or gasoline or whatever it is. And then


125

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

that would be maybe 90 percent efficient. And then you put

that that the power plant, and that has an efficiency of

around 32 percent. And then you have electricity at the

power plant. And then you have to ship that electricity to

end users. And you have transmission and distribution

losses, so you have about 88.8 percent that comes to the

end user ultimately. So that means for every one unit the

end user uses, you have to put in 4.42 units of energy to

give him that one unit. So that has to be taken into

account when you're determining both the energy benefits

and the carbon dioxide emissions benefits.

The other thing that it points out is that if you have

an end user that uses, say, photovoltaics.on their home or

solar water heating system, they actually provide for

benefits than you have for a utility powered -- or utility

scale wind or some other system because you don't have

those transmission and distribution losses. So it's a

distributed generation type thing where you avoid the 68.8

percent situation there.

So I've done this analysis, and I've looked at what

are the benefits of doing a 100,000 tons of seawater

air-conditioning. Well, we could save about 344 million

kilowatt hours per year. That's about 4 percent of HECO's

output, so reduce fossil fuel energy use by about 4.6

trillion BTUs, which is the equivalent to almost 800,000


126

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

barrels per year of imported oil, or oil from the source,

and reduced greenhouse gas emission by about 377,000 tons.

Well, that doesn't really mean much to most people,

but what is that equivalent to? It's equivalent to about

123 megawatts of utility scale wind energy. As I said

earlier, we maybe can do 50 megawatts or maybe 80 megawatts

of wind on Oahu. It's also equivalent to about 187

megawatts of utility scale photovoltaics or 87,000

residential PV systems or 60 megawatts of utility scale

waste-to-energy. Right now the system we have is 60

megawatts, so it would be equivalent to having another

municipal solid waste system on Oahu. And then we could

take another equivalency. It's equivalent to taking 62,000

SUVS off the road or buying and using 115,000 Prius HEVs.

And there's been a big push towards doing ethanol, and

we took a look at what is the equivalency of ethanol. If

we look at corn-based ethanol, which has a relatively small

net energy benefit, this production or reduction in energy

use is equivalent to 247 million gallons of imported

corn-based ethanol. We need about 40 to 45 million to

produce 10 percent ethanol. It's also equivalent to about

88 ruillion gallons of local cellulose-based ethanol per

yeaj:. But what that says is that it's much better to

produce that ethanol locally from a cellulose feedstock

than it is to make it from corn. So when you're doing your


127

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

policy determinations, you want to obviously produce this

stuff locally and produce it with a maximum efficiency or

better efficiency.

And finally, it's equivalent to about 123,000

residential solar water heating systems, which is about

50 percent more than the systems that we have in the state.

Each ton of seawater air-conditioning is equivalent to

about one solar water heating system.

So basically what you need to do is not just look at a

whole variety of renewable energy technologies. You need

to look at them in a systematic manner. You need to

identify those that have the best potential in the near

term, mid term, and long term and divide the money, the

limited resources that you have, among those technologies

to get the best bang for the buck in the nearest term. And

this is one approach, and I hope that this IRP process will

use a similar approach to look at the benefits and look at

the things that we should be doing over these three time

ranges.

THE MODERATOR: Good. Thank you very much. That was

excellent.

Okay. Our next speaker is Brian Kealoha, and he's

gonna talk about energy efficiency. Brian is with Energy

Industries.


128

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Mr. Brian Kealoha, Energy Industries

MR. KEALOHA: This court reporter in makes me nervous.

I'm half Portuguese, so I naturally talk very fast, so I'll

make a conscious effort here to slow down.

Okay. So my presentation today is really to focus on

energy efficiency and how energy efficiency can really help

reduce the carbon emissions around the planet, and no more

so than here in Hawai'i. Because the majority of our

generation really being fossil fuel dependent, a kilowatt

hour saved has a much larger impact than some of the

national average numbers I'm going to be going through

today in our presentation.

So before we can get into efficiency, we first have to

better understand how buildings use energy and how we use

energy as a society. This slide really illustrates how

much U.S. commercial buildings across the nation utilize in

terms of their percentage of electricity. So you can see

here that 72 percent of all electric consumption is really

used by commercial buildings. And then again, on the

mainland where there's more natural gas, you see 54 percent

of that consumption, as well as 38 percent of the carbon

dioxide emissions. And that's pretty huge when you look at


129

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the fact that the U.S. -- commercial buildings in the U.S.

produce more carbon emissions than any other country, their

combined emissions in the world, other than China. So the

significance of our energy footprint is very large.

Breaking that down a little further, the two pie

charts there on your right, you'll see the difference

between commercial and residential. And again, these are

more national numbers than they are specific to Hawai'i,

but you can see the different end uses in terms of how we

use our energy. Cooling is one of the largest loads. And

then when you're in the commercial sector, the next is

lighting, followed by water heating, plug load,

refrigeration. On the residential side air-conditioning

and heating end up being the highest amount of electrical

and gas usage, which results as well in the C02 emissions.

Lightin

larger

little

So

energy

a third

it's pr

oil.

Sc

mean in

g and, here

segment of

bit less.

where with

efficiency

to save th

obably even

we have th

terms of p

in Hawai

that. On

are we g

'i, water heating

the

oing

national

with this

is a much

average it's a

?

is the low-hanging fruit.

e energy

greater

than

here

is low-hangin

otential? Th

it is to

in Hawai

g fruit.

pre

Basically,

It costs with

duce it. And

i with the cost of

What does that

is pie chart really helps


130

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

illustrate the dramatic effect that emissions can be

reduced by pursuing energy efficiency. When you look at

all the different renewable energy resources combined, it

still does not up to as much as energy efficiency can

provide. So it seems very clear that it's low-hanging

fruit. There's a lot of potential out there.

The question is then. Why aren't we doing it? Well,

we're going to get into that a little bit, but the first

thing when we're looking at the hierarchy in terms of what

you should pursue, the common industry assumption is you're

gonna do efficiency first. And no matter if you're gonna

be looking at renewable energy systems, what you want to do

is make your building as efficient as possible before you

get started. And then, as you can see here, the next piece

of the hierarchy is really looking at on-site renewable

energy and then switching to cleaner fuels. Again, that

comes back it the cost effectiveness, as well as the pure

economics for what you want to size your renewable energy

systems to be.

The potential, this graph really illustrates where

we're gonna be with business as usual utilizing our

electricity as we are now without making any changes. But

I think what is most significant is that we cannot only

stem our growth, but actually reduce the amount of

electricity that needs to be produced in this country by


• 131

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

simply implementing energy efficiency, whether it be in

measures that we can implement in our home or our business

or by policies that governments can institute to really

promote and push energy efficiency.

So how much does it all cost? That's always the key.

Who can tell me how much this cost?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: About a dollar.

MR. KEALOHA: A dollar?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah.

MR. KEALOHA: What about this?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Three dollars.

MR. KEALOHA: Three dollars?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Before the rebates.

MR. KEALOHA: And that's typically how we look at

things. But I'll tell you that this actually costs you

$102, and this costs you $30. Let me show you how.

When you look at the cost for a year, if you were to

burn both of these lamps for one year -- sure, I went on

the high side. I said $6, and I went 50 cents to even make

this analysis more conservative. But you can see that even

though see the initial cost is significantly greater, over

time when you're using the amount of kilowatt hours that

you're using to power both of these lamps, your actual cost

and replacement cost as well as energy, is very

significant.


132

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

And that's pretty much one of the biggest barriers to

achieving greater energy efficiency. Most businesses and

consumers are first cost driven, so we're looking at ways

to value engineer systems to take out the initial costs of

buildings. However, that is probably the worst thing that

you can do because over the long term you're costing your

facility a lot of extra money. In addition, it's requiring

a lot more generation that's going to be required to be

produced on this island. Couple that with the amount of

emissions that's produced. In addition, initial capital

outlay can be tough to come up with. You know, if you're

going to the store, you have ten dollars in your pocket,

and you need to by ten light bulbs, you're probably gonna

buy these. So it's very tough sometimes to come up with

the initial capital outlay even if you know it's a

no-brainer to move forward.

Another challenge is there's a lot of products out

there that don't live up to the hype. Being that energy

costs are so high right now, there's a lot of different

things and technologies out there that claim to be able to

do a lot of things. As a result, there are people who are

buying into some of the hype that's out there. It really

can dampen a market because people have been burned. They

don't see the savings on the bill that they expected.

But once again, a case in point is when the CFLs


133

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

first came out, compact fluorescents first came out. When

they first came out it was really a challenge because there

was a lot of low quality product out there. And I'm sure a

lot of you remember that when the first generation of these

CFLs, they would blink on six or seven times. My wife

hated it. She said. Get those lamps out of our house. But

along the way technology has advanced, and the product has

become better. And as result, people who may have been

burned by that first situation of CFL that didn't work so

well may be reluctant to purchase efficient products as

they go forward.

And lastly, as we all know, it's really expensive to

live here in Hawai'i. The cost of products, to have them

shipped out there, is expensive. And probably more

importantly, the availability is sometimes difficult. If a

piece of equipment fails, what happens? You need to

replace that right away. Well, if the efficient equipment

isn't stocked here locally, the less efficient equipment

gets put in.

So what can be done to facilitate more energy

efficiency here in Hawai'i? Well, of course, education. I

mean, that's the first step, the fact that we're all here

today to hesu: about what we can do to reduce carbon

emissions. It starts, number one, with efficiency. The

second is really looking for state tax credits and state


134

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

incentives to help promote energy efficiency in addition to

renewable energy. You saw the pie chart. The significance

of what energy efficiency can be in terms of reducing

carbon emissions is large. Federal tax deductions are

available, but we have nothing on a state level in terms of

energy efficient credits.

We talked about here a little bit the initial first

cost, and a lot of times that's a big barrier for people or

companies to move forward with projects, so finding ways to

finance these energy efficient upgrades and bringing them

at zero or low interest through either DSM funds or through

a special purpose revenue bond. There's ways to help

facilitate the implementation of these measures.

And, you know, a lot of the state agencies capture the

benefit of energy efficiency products. A lot of the

different departments here have an electrical budget, but

they're not going to be real aggressive in pursuing

electrical efficiency because they're afraid that once

they've made those reductions, their electrical budget in

the following year is gonna be reduced, so they don't see

the benefits of it, and they don't get to keep the rebates

that are associated with these projects. So we need to

have incentives in place to really push and promote all of

our state agencies to be aggressive in energy efficiency.

And one of the first steps was pursuing the in all new


135

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

buildings the LEED silver is requirement, and that's a good

first step because energy is a component of LEED, and LEED

encompasses a lot of other things. But we're getting there

on the new building side. We need to really look at

policies that can be done on an existing building side.

So what can you do when you go home today? Probably

the most significant thing is if you don't have a solar

water heater, go do it. Now there's never been a better

time. There's state tax credits available, federal tax

credits available, large rebates from HECO. There's new

programs coming out to do the pay-as-you-you-save so you

don't have to -- the payments mark your savings. There

really hasn't been a better time to do it. So if you

haven't doing this already, you should be doing it.

The second is what we talked about already: compact

fluorescent lamps, $100 versus the $30, huge difference,

not to mention the lamp life over the course of 10,000

hours versus 1,000 hours for incandescents. And if you're

air-conditioning your home, there's a lot less heat than

that's generated from incandescents, so that reduces the

amount of electricity that needed to be generated.

Probably number three is just the use of Energy Star

appliances. I think you've all seen these labels on

different appliances or even on buildings. But when you're

looking to replace appliances, look for the Energy Star


136

,

"""

-

'

- •

i 1

L

f

-

[

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

logo. Naturally, these are all measures that you can ••-

that you need to invest in. But I think as a whole,

behaviorally, there's obviously a lot of things you can do,

those are the no-brainers: turning off the lights when

you're not in a room, all the simple things that are easy

to do that we often forget just out of ease. Using fans

instead of air-conditioning, there's a lot of simple things

our behaviors can modify as well.

On the commercial side, you know, the game plan really

it's being aggressive in finding energy savings is to do

commissioning and studies. There's a lot of buildings with

great energy efficient technologies already employed, but

over the years the program and the logic behind them have

changed or things have been changed in terms of how the

buildings operate; and therefore, the systems aren't

maximized towards efficiency. So recommissioning

buildings, looking at studies, finding ways to reduce

energy usage through the different end uses that are in the

building. And that's really what's outlined here. You

know, lighting retrofitting, it's a no-brainer. It's a

low-hanging fruit. Energy management systems to use only

what you need to use, drives, motors, pumps,

air-conditioning, it goes on and on. And similarly, these

are just some other examples that you can look for in your

commercial building.


137

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

I want to close with, you know, really the most

expensive thing we can do is nothing. And expensive can

mean whether it be dollars, the amount of energy that

we're -- dollars we're spending in terms of energy. It can

be in the amount of carbon emissions that we're producing.

By doing nothing and continuing down the path we're going

now is not a road that I think any of us wants to go down,

and efficiency can be a big portion of what we do first.

We really are all responsible for the solutions out there.

And that's my presentation.

THE MODERATOR: Great presentation, Brian. Thanks.

Our third speaker is Shanah Trevenna from the

Sustainability Saunders program on the UH Manoa campus.

Shanah.

WHAT EACH O F US CAN DO

Ms. Shanah Trevenna, Sus tainable Saunders

MS. TREVENNA: Well, I'm Italian, so I'm going to

speak quickly and talk with my hands, so I hope that works

with you.

THE MODERATOR: She's got to be able to write it down.

MS. TREVENNA: Okay. I'll do my best to be clear.

First of all, I just wanted to say it's an honor to be

up here. It's my first panel. And there's a lot of people


138

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

on this panel and in the room who've been working for

years, if not decades, just to bring us to the point of

even having this conversation in Hawai'i. So thank you so

much for the work that you've done to pave the way for

this.

We've been talking a lot today about the big picture,

and I just wanted to propose for a moment think back to

maybe the beginning of your day with your morning routine

and what you're doing this weekend just to get back in

touch with your life here, individual flow of your day, and

that's because I'm going to be talking about what each of

us can do, individual actions we can take to add up to

collective difference.

Now I also want to ask you to take any thoughts of

images or conversations that you've had that have maybe

formed a belief that sustainable is sacrifice and just

suspend that belief for a moment. And then I'd like to

propose that sustainability could be perceived as

simplicity and streamlining your life so that you have 'more

time and money and energy to do the things you love,

connect with yourself, each other, and the world that we

live in, the land, and also any feelings that you have of

being overwhelmed. There's been a lot said today. There's

lots of different choices and -- bound to happen.

There's a way of approaching this that I've developed


139

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

for myself that I call the six-pack, the sustainability

six-pack, picking six things that you can work on. And the

reason I picked six is because people can actually look at

six items and see six. They can look and see three. They

can look and see five. Once it's beyond six, they have to

start counting. So six just seems to be a manageable scope

for people.

And I'd like to break that even further into a bit of

pyramid: three things that you can do and choices in your

own life; two things that -- sorry, I just have to look

here -- two ways to interconnect your community, and that's

kind of a different angle that I'll get into in a moment;

and the third is to support one renewable energy of your

choice. If you do those six things, you'11 be connected to

yourself, the middle picture, and the big picture in a way

that's really manageable.

So I'm gonna go through a bit of a smorgasbord. And

just go by what jumps out at you, what feels like a pull

and not a push. That's another philosophy we use at the

university. If it's a push, it feels like sacrifice. It

feels like a lot of hard work, and you get resentful, and

you don't keep up the steam to keep it going. If it feels

like a pull, then you .feel excited. You feel like that's a

really cool idea. It'll save me a lot of money. So see

what feels like a pull to you. And there's enough of us


140

1 that if we all do different things, it will add up.

2 So first, I'm gonna start with personal choices. Try

3 to pick three that jump out at you. The first is to -- the

4 first section is to lead a non-disposable life. And we

5 know that we're, you know, sort of a throw-away society.

6 Things come into our world. We dispose of it. It all goes

7 in a landfill. But a really interesting thing about

8 Hawai'i is anything that we use to replace it, we're

9 pulling in. We're actually shipping here. It's taking a

10 lot of fossil fuels to get here. So, for example, I went

11 to one juice joint on the island. I asked them how many

12 cups they go through. They go through a thousand --

13 (Discussion off the record.)

14 MS. TREVENNA; So I'm just going to continue then!

15 So I was saying, juice joints in Hawai'i, one of them

16 uses a thousand 24-ounce cups a day. I can see how a

17 thousand 24-ounce cups would be a lot to capture. So by

18 making a choice of bringing a cup, bringing a plate,

19 bringing utensils, you're making an impact right there In

20 Beijing they're banning one-time-use chopsticks, for

21 example. It's happening in other parts of the world. In

22 Canada there's 750 million cell phones in landfill. So if

23 you're like me and you only know that you have a 3.1

24 megapixel phone only when you hit the wrong button, it

25 annoys you, in a couple years when my contract comes up and


141

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

they want to give me a 7 megapixel phone, I probably will

pass it. And so that's a really easy one for me. It's

like falling off a log, simple.

So another section is how you move yourself around.

And obviously if we could bike and if we could walk, there

would be a lot less carbon emissions. Most -- 50 percent

of trips are made within three miles of your home, so if

you just make an agreement with yourself to do a walk or a

bike ride for those threes miles, you'd -- we'd get rid of

50 percent of our trips.

If you idle, if you're going to be idling for more

than 30 seconds, it's worth it to turn your car off. That

gets over the idea that, you know, it takes a lot of energy

to start it up again.

And this is an interesting one. Intense braking and

starting wastes a lot of energy, that, you know, rush to

get where you're going. They've actually measured that

it's only 4 percent of your time that gets shaved off, and

it actually uses 40 percent more fuel.. Fifty percent of

the gas used in the city is used for accelerating. That's

an interesting one. And, of course, all that's lost in

braking, which brings me to hybrids, which are just the

coolest thing. All -- most of that energy in the braking

is returned to the battery, so it's captured again. With

the new solar roofs that have come out for hybrids, they're


142

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

in

some

at 125 miles per gallon.

And if you use your air-conditioning on a hot day

your car, then you're using an extra 10 percent as well.

If you keep the air in your tires, your air filter

change, and you use the right oil, 20 percent better gas

mileage as well. So there's a few things you can do.

In your home -- I know for Saunders -- and we saw

different stats -- 80 percent of the electricity use is for

air-conditioning and lighting, Yet when we do focus groups

with people, they said that they -- like the thing that

they would like the most is natural ventilation and natural

lighting.

So I'd like to start with ventilation, the opposing

window idea. When you open up the driver's side and the

passenger's side, it's way better crosswind. You can do

that in your house with a fan facing outwards. It can

suction the air across. And I won't get into the mechanics

of fans, but if you have two fans going at 50 percent the

power, that actually uses less energy than one fan going at

100 percent of the power. So you can use different fans

and use less energy. A lot of people don't know about

that.

And then jumping to daylighting, so daylighting is a

great thing because students that use daylighting have

to 25 percent higher test scores. And also our eyes are

20


143

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

not adapted to go from isolated light to no light at all.

So uniform light in a room is very important for the human

experience. So to bring daylighting in, the biggest bang

for your buck is a light shelf. It's kind of like a visor

for your window. It just above the sight line. It divides

the window into two halves. The top part has the light

reflect off and come to the -- into the room, bouncing off

the ceiling. Painting the ceiling with a highly reflective

paint will then diffuse the light down into the room, and

the wall that's opposite of the lighting as well.

Interior rooms, you can bring lighting in by knocking

out part of the wall if possible or putting glass, a glass

window. They also have solar collectors that take --

THE MODERATOR: Shanah, slow down.

MS. TREVENNA: -- oh, thanks, yeah -- that take fiber

optics, and the sunlight comes through the fiber optics

into the center of the room. So you can actually kind of

pipe in sunlight.

So if you do have lights -- I won't get too much into

this 'cause we covered that replacing an incandescent with

CFL is definitely the way to

incandescent lights all over

country that's

incandescents.

If you do

go.

the

moving towards ab

completely having

have fluorescent

In Canada

place. So

they

that

solutely banning

none .

lights. you can

re

's

do

banning

a whole

-- you


144

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

can drop the whole ballast down about 18 inches, cover the

bottom, and have all the light reflect up to the ceiling.

And then that light will then diffuse down into the room,

creating that whole uniform lighting I was speaking of.

That actually saves about 75 percent of the energy. It

goes from needing 2 watts per square foot down to ,7 watts

per square foot. So then if you can find three things in

there, I hope three things jumped out at you.

And then interconnecting with your community is a big

one. And this is why in Denmark businesses that were

neighbors got together and wrote down all the inputs arid

all the outputs that were coming into the businesses. And

one found that they were paying for a chemical to be

imported from Spain while the company next door was paying

for that exact same chemical to be disposed of. So they

were able to just make that match, save a lot of importing

and exporting, and everyone made a lot more money.

In British Columbia -- this is a little stray -- a pig

farmer went to a neighborhood theater and said. Can we use

your extra popcorn to feed the pigs? No problem, except

that the pig farmer, organic farmer, so they needed organic

popcorn. So then the theater owner went to a corn

producer, asked them if they would make organic corn. They

went to the bank and said, I have a guaranteed market; can

you give me a loan to go organic? So all these win-win-win


145

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

situations when you know your neighbor.

And we know this in personal experience, I'm sure. If

you drive across town to drop off your kids at daycare, to

go to the yoga class or take a cooking class, if you know

your neighbors, you might find out that people right in

your community could do ail of those things for you. So

that -- that really helps to grow a local economy as well.

For a thriving community economy, a dollar should pass

between all the people in the community five times before

it leaves. They know this in Salt Spring Island off of the

coast of British Columbia where they have Salt Spring

dollars where you actually buy the dollars, and you can

only pay -- use them in Salt Spring. Tourists come in and

take those, and that money stays in Salt Spring. So

there's an island which created a local economy with local

currency, which would be an opportunity here, I think, as

well- So then the -- and so if you could find two ways to

do that.

And then the third would be to support your favorite

renewable energy of choice. We've gone -- I won't go

through them all since they've already been covered

beautifully. But my favorite is ocean wave given that

there's -- it's 800 times the density of air, water. And

I've stood in the wind, and I've stood in the waves, and

one really pushes me over harder. I feel like there's a


146

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

lot of energy there that's waiting to be harnessed in a way

that's not intrusive to the coastline. So with great minds

working together, I feel like that could be the energy that

fuels the future.

So with making three choices in your personal life,

two new ways of interconnecting your community, and

supporting one renewable energy, you'll feel great; you'll

have more money, more time, more energy for yourself and

your community; and I believe you'll also be part of a very

important, very big positive movement. Thank you.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Shanah. Sorry for insisting

on the breaks going on.

Our next speaker is Jeff Mikulina. Jeff's with the

Sierra Club, and he's been very active in the Energy Policy

Forum. Jeff's gonna talk to us about Motivating Change,

From Belief to Behavior. Jeff.

FROM BELIEF TO BEHAVIOR: MOTIVATING CHANGE

Mr. Jeff MDculina, Sierra Club

MR- MIKULINA: Thanks, Mike. How's this? All right

I really appreciate this opportunity to talk about

this fun subject. There won't be any math involved in

presentation, fortunately, on Friday afternoon here.

I heard an ad the other day on the radio that I

my


147

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

thought was absolutely terrible. It was trying to motivate

behavior change on another very serious subject, drunk

driving. You may have heard this ad on the radio. It's

brought to you by the Department of Transportation. Three

things stood out of why it was so bad. It started by

having some kind of upbeat music in the background, and an

announcer who sounded like he just finished a spot for a

used car lot said, if you drink and drive, you may get in

an accident or cause some harm or something. And the spot

ended with him saying, Don't let drunk driving happen to

you.

The three things that stood out, number one, just

delivering that information without any sort of strong

emotional pull really made it ineffective. Secondly, that

ending piece saying don't let drunk driving happen to you

removed you from the equation. It was something that, oh,

it happened again. How did it happen? It wasn't a

decision you made with clear consequences. And finally,

the third, those consequences weren't very clear. We know

drunk driving, you can kill yourselves. You can kill

someone you love. And if you want to change behavior, we

have to make that very clear that that could result from

your decision.

Those are the three areas that I want to explore today

relating to climate change. The first is this idea that


148

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

knowledge is everything. We're smarter than we ever have

been on this issue, but it hasn't seemed to be motivating

behavior nearly as much as we'd like. Nobody marched on

Washington because of a pie chart. We really have to evoke

those emotional responses in people if we want -- if we

expect to have them make those big changes in their lives.

The second one, one which we talked quite a bit about today

is the idea of barriers. It's not easy being green, and

there are a lot of barriers to doing the right thing when

it comes to moving to higher efficiency or renewable energy

or changing life-style and behavior. And finally, I want

to talk a bit about those sequences and how do we pay the

price, the right price, the accurate price. We're human.

We respond to pain and pleasure. We're animals in that

way, and we shouldn't lose sight of that when looking for

solutions to motivating behavior.

The first idea of this, knowledge is power. Let's

take a look at a recent Gallup Poll in April of Americans.

Sixty percent of Americans believe that global warming has

begun to affect the climate. So we made quite a bit o::

progress on this issue, and certainly over the past year

there's been -- we see change in how folks view climate

change. People are more aware of this than ever. This

number actually increased about 8 percent over the prior

year. Sixty-two percent believe that climate change will


149

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

cause major or extreme changes in climate during the next

50 years. So folks are, again, aware of the problem. They

know it's happening.

Now 20 percent of those questioned said they either

use renewable energy or they're participating in green

pricing programs. So folks are claiming they want to be

perceived as doing the right thing at this time. The fact

of the matter is fewer than 4 percent actually participate.

So although that knowledge is there, folks aren't really

responding in their day-to-day lives, at least at this

level in doing energy sorts of things.

Since we're talking about Americans, a poll at the

same time, a Roper Poll, actually showed that 17 percent

believe in alien abductions. This is a point reference for

America.

This chart is terribly important. It talks about --

it shows the acidification that's occurring in the ocean

that's going to probably change things in Hawai'i like the

reefs or the basis of our marine food chain, but it doesn't

inspire a lot of emotion. Similarly with this, this is a

fairly dry thing, nothing to argue here. This is what's

happening on the ground globally, but it doesn't inspire

the same sort of heart-string emotion as maybe this image

does, the actual effects of a warming globe. Or this one,

penguin party barge, but these guys are actually in bad


150

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

shape.

Similarly, a fact here from National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, as the water temperature

increases from a warmer globe, the wind velocity increases,

and storm moisture content increases. We know warmer water

means stronger hurricanes now, but that doesn't nearly

inspire the same emotion as looking at Hurricane Katrina

come across the warm waters in the gulf and turn into that

new storm that struck two years ago. This was an event

that definitely shook the American people and invoked that

sort of emotion. It wasn't the chart. It was seeing these

sorts of pictures of what actually happened in New Orleans,

again, about two years ago. This is what can motivate

behavior, when people see the consequences emotionally of

action.

Talk about barriers now, things that get in the waiy of

us doing the right thing. Once you have that knowledge

you feel emotionally drawn. You want to do the right

thing. And all of a sudden you find out you want to go one

direction but you just can't. There are barriers in place.

It could be as simple as cost, economics. It could be

habit- There are a lot of things that make it difficult to

do the right thing, move from -- we heard from Brian --

from incandescents to compact fluorescents, or to get

someone out of this and put them into this. Or better yet.


151

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

have them carpool. Or even better, put them on the bus.

Or the best, get them on a bike. Of course, there are a

lot of hurdles and barriers to doing so. Biking, maybe the

lack of bike lanes in this town is probably one of the

biggest barriers. I know for me personally, if I have a

meeting, I think about am I gonna be sweaty? What am I

gonna do? You have to think of a lot if you're gonna ride

your bike that day, how far you have to go, what's the

weather doing. So there are barriers.

Similarly, we want to convert this roof to this roof

or, even better, this roof. There's a huge cost hurdle

involved there. So there are barriers to doing the right

thing even if people have the knowledge and feel

emotionally pulled.

Some of the barriers are pretty stupid. We have some

homeowner associations that prevent the use of

clotheslines, something that saves a bunch of money, a

bunch of C02 if folks can get in the habit of using a

clothesline on sunny days instead of a dryer. Some of

them, people are just lazy. We have to acknowledge that.

If it's not your job, it's not your job.

Speaking of being lazy, this brings up a great example

with our garbage situation on this island. We know we have

a solid waste crisis. We don't seem to be very good at

responding to it. The vast majority of waste components on


152

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

this island can be recycled or composted or dealt with

besides a landfill or incinerator, but we recycle very

little of it. It's no surprise though when the City comes

to your house not once, but twice a week to pick up your

trash. So think about those two choices. Do you recycle,

or do you just throw it away? Well, you know if you throw

it away, you can just take it to the curb and they'll deal

with it. If you want to recycle though, you actually have

to get in your car, find a high school, go to a redemption

center, a lot of things in the way of doing the right thing

as opposed to doing the not sustainable thing. However, if

you turn one of those weeks -- one of those pickups into

curbside recycling, it will really lower that barrier for

folks doing the right thing. You can take your pickle jars

and newspapers to the curb and they pick them up.

This is critically important because in the past seven

years, believe it or not, per capita waste production on

this island has increased 26 percent, which is from the

most recent study that the City commissioned. Despite all

this reduce, reuse, recycle, despite the best intentions,

we're getting worse and worse at dealing with our trash and

our trash production, yet still no curbside program for

this island. It's unclear when we'll get it. So that'

one of the barriers.

Getting back to climate change, another barrier to


153

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

taking action is this idea that we have an effect on what's

happening. The social scientist Helen Ingram said if we

want people to respond to a problem, we need to have three

ingredients. The first is the problem and the impact of

the problem has to occur soon. It has to be something

that's going to occur in the near term. Second, the issue

has to be salient to the person. And finally, it has to be

certain. So we have to be clear that this is what's gonna

result from this action.

The thing about global climate change, why some like

James Hansen calls it the public policy from hell is

because it doesn't have these three ingredients right now.

It's unclear when the impacts are really going to occur.

How much can I really impact it? How salient is it to me?

What is the impact? And isn't there still some uncertainty

about exactly what's gonna happen? It makes it very

difficult for us, for community members, for policymakers

to do the right thing. If your house is on fire, you know

how you're gonna respond. We don't have that sort of

urgency right now with global climate change.

Public opinion polls show that people believe that

global climate change is confusing. They don't see how it

relates to them in a day-to-day way. It won't affect them

personally, most people believe. It's a problem for the

future, not now. And finally, probably a bigger one, is


154

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

they can't -- they can't really be affective by their

individual actions because the problem is just so big. As

Al Gore says, folks often move from despair to denial

without stopping in the middle and actually taking action

that's effective. This is a barrier to taking action, all

of these .things where folks particularly feel as though

their actions don't have the effectiveness they would like.

It's just a drop in the bucket. It's not going to make a

difference.

Current attitudes towards this issue, people are

unclear on climate change, the causes or solutions. So

that is somewhat of an information problem. We have to cut

through the clutter and get the right information out.

People don't think it will affect them personally. The

issue is pretty negative and depressing, and because of it,

people don't include climate change in the -- as an

important issue in making the day-to-day decisions, which

is handy for humans to basically ignore the problem.

This is where we'd like to be though, the ideal

attitudes where folks understand climate change and its

causes - They see the impact it may have in their lives and

their kids lives, and you feel empowered to take action and

finally integrate that into your daily decision-making

This is the challenge that we have.

There's some strategies to do this, and there's a


155

1 whole host of literature on human psychology behind getting

2 people to change their behavior in this way, but some of

3 them -- real briefly, one is this idea of prompts where

4 you're constantly reminding people of the issue and the

5 solution because, as we all know, out of sight, out of

6 mind. Making public commitments or commitments that are

7 visible to others, people are much more likely to follow up

8 on and respond to because all of us want to be viewed as

9 someone who follows through with what they say and that

10 they're consistent that way. And the most powerful

11 probably is the idea of normative social pressure or peer

12 pressure where we respond to how others around us are

13 behaving. I like to call this conspicuous conservatlonism,

14 folks that are visibly outward in a conservation behavior

15 as a way of kind of gaining acceptance. There's a group, a

16 local group called Kanui Hawai'i who's trying to invoke

17 some of these strategies in making change. I encourage you

18 to check them out.

19 Finally, consequences, and this is do our actions have

20 clear consequences? With global climate change it's so

21 difficult because the consequence might be something that

22 occurs a hundred years from now; it might not. It's really

23 unclear. Certain behaviors, if you make it clear what the

24 consequence is, people will respond.

25 Another solid waste example really quick, three years


156

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

ago we recycled about 25 percent of our bottles and cans in

this state. As soon as we tacked a nickel on to each of

those containers, the recycling rate, incredibly, over

three or four short months tripled. Just a small change

made a big difference in that case. Now we've recycled

about a billion bottles and cans since it took effect in

January of 2005. This chart is actually a littie bit

dated. It's dropped down a little bit, but nonetheless,

we've still pretty much tripled the recycling rate due to

the bottle laws.

It's not unique to Hawai'i. This happens all over.

This is a graph showing the redemption rates, basically the

return rates at different levels of deposit. About 20

percent with no deposit, that's just a background volunteer

recycling rate; 70 to 80 percent for a five cent deposit.

Michigan has a ten cent deposit. Their return is about 90

percent. And if you go to Germany, you'll be paying a

quarter Euro on bottles and cans. They recycle at 99.8

percent of bottles and cans. So people respond to this

economic driver even if it's small change like a nickel on

a soda bottle.

You're already paying the price for our actions

involving global climate change. You know what gas costs

now. But is it enough to really change behavior like we'd

like to see behavior changed? People are taking action.


157

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

B

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

We're seeing some major players pushing some of the these

solutions to save people money. Like Wal-Mart's selling

compact fluorescents. But is it really enough to get us

where we need to be?

One solution to address the future cost of climate

change is to have a carbon tax, and this is something that

has been batted around. I think New Zealand has passed

one. Boulder Colorado has one. But it's a way to kind of

capture those future costs of climate change today and help

inspire people to make the right decisions. It's something

that people kind of first looked at the idea of a tax. You

can also view it the other way as making it easy to do the

right things because whatever we collect on the carbon

side, we help subsidize the sustainability sorts of

measures, efficiency, sequestration, things like that.

Just a real world example would be the idea of a

rebate. California's currently debating such a measure.

We had a discussion in this building a number of times

where Hummers pay for hybrids. A heavier, more expensive,

less efficient vehicle would have a small tax on it, and

that would be applied to a rebate for a more efficient

vehicle, just a way, again, of trying to shift behavior

through economic consequence. And we think things like

this make sense, just the example of people making sure we

pay a full price and change behavior that way. That is.


158

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

ultimately, if people don't respond to the emotional pull,

to the other ways, if you hit them in the pocketbook,

people will change behavior.

So just to summarize those kind of three ideas, again,

back to that radio ad that was so disturbing -- it's still

running. You might have a chance to hear it. It does

nothing to change behavior because knowledge alone isn

power. It really needs to have an emotional component

Feelings buttressed by facts work far better.

We have to eliminate barriers to doing the right

thing. And that's really a role for policy and for

everyday behavior change. One of those barriers is this

perception that you cannot change the problem. And that's

going to be the biggest issue that I think we'll have to

tackle with global climate change. Each of us is -- can

make a difference. Global climate change doesn't happen to

us. It's something that we can actually affect.

And finally, making saving the planet saving money.

And that might require new tools with a carbon tax, shift

behavior, hitting people in the pocketbook. But let's all

remember what Winston Churchill said: People and nations

behave wisely once they've exhausted all other

alternatives. Bear this in mind when moving forward.

Thanks.

THE MODERATOR: That last one was inspiring, Jeff.


159

Thanks.

Our final speaker before the Q & A is going to be

Dr. Barry Raleigh with the University of Hawai'i. Barry

came here to become Dean of the School of Ocean and Earth

Sciences and Technology, and now he's a recovering dean

back in research mode and also doing some pretty exciting

things. Barry.

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

FEEDSTOCK FOR THE FUTURE

Dr. Barry Raleigh, University of Hawaii

DR. RALEIGH: Yes, excuse me. Thank you.

The elephant that's in the room that nobody has quite

talked about even in our discussions of policy is that the

world has, according to all the scientists in the earth

sciences that I know who can claim some knowledge about the

oil resources of the world believe that there's a peak now

occurring in the actual global production of oil, that we

will not see a rise in the future again of the total annual

production of oil. That's a -- that's an alarming fact if

it's true. Personally, I believe that it is. But if it is

true, the other side of the room has another elephant in

it, and that is the fact that the population of the world

is not leveling off. It's going up. And the demand for

petroleum will increase probably something in the


160

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the

on

neighborhood of 3 percent a year.

So what do we do? Well, most energy uses actually

don't require oil. There are ways to get around the

problem. Conservation is the most obvious, of course.

Don't use as much. But on the other hand, there's coal

There's nuclear power. However, if you're interested In

getting from here to there on wheels, you need oil. You

need something that's liquid that has high energy density,

easily transportable, and there aren't many substitutes yet

for that. Hydrogen certainly is not one of them.

By the year 2030, according to Royal Dutch Shell,

demand for petroleum will exceed the supply by 10 billii

barrels per year. The current global production is only a

little over 30 billion barrels a year. This represents an

increase in demand above what we believe to be the peak

level of supply by about a 30 percent level.

Chevron Oil Company makes some predictions about how

we're going to accommodate between 2005 and about 2 030 the

extra demand. Shale oil, believe it or not, that terrible

idea back in the eighties to actually dig up Colorado and

extract the oil from the shale is even listed here.

There's biofuels which constitutes in their estimate

probably in the neighborhood of about 5 million barrels a

day, which is a substantial. That's the order of about

2 billion barrels a year. Gas to liquids, that's where you


161

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

take natural gas and make liquid fuels out of it. It's a

very expensive process, but there's a lot of gas around.

It's a good idea. Extra heavy oil and bitumen, that really

means the tar sand that you all have read about somewhere,

I'm sure, in Athabasca and also Venezuela. The problem --

and the problem is that that's really the easiest to get at

and the most expensive in terms of carbon dioxide

production to extract. It takes -- it takes three barrels

of oil mined to get one barrel that you can actually take

to market and sell. And that extra oil is used in burning,

in effect, to make the heat to extract the tar. It is

not -- it's not a nice solution.

By 2025, 2 billion barrels a year will come from tar

sand. That will be 2 billion tons per year more of carbon

dioxide in the atmosphere unless there's found a way to

extract it, strip it, and store it. The gas to liquid

plants will yield about 700 million barrels a year. That

would be about 250 million tons more per year of carbon

dioxide. And to compare it with something, all the U.S.

coal-fired plants right now currently produce 2 billion

tons per year of carbon dioxide. So we're not looking at a

decreasing supply of carbon dioxide. If anybody wants it,

there's gonna be plenty of it.

The world consumption by region of coal -- and this is

a problem that puts everything else in the shade. The


162

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19-

20

21

22

23

24

25

expectations by the International Energy Agency are that

the total consumption of coal between 2003 and about 25

years later or so, 2030, will -- globally will increase by

5 -- almost 5 billion tons per year. That -- the fact is

that coal -- a ton of coal makes about three and a half

tons of carbon dioxide, so you can do the math yourself

That's almost doubling the carbon dioxide. Well, it's

another 60 percent of increase in carbon dioxide over that

that goes into the atmosphere today.

The — well, I said that already.

What do you do about it? Well, there's sequestration.

Strip it out of the stack and then pipe it over somewhere

or somehow transport the carbon dioxide from the power

plant to a deep well where it's injected into a saline

aquifer and then monitored to make sure it doesn't come

sneaking and bubbling back out somewhere. That process

costs somewhere between 30 to 60 dollars per ton of carbon

dioxide sequestered. So you can imagine if you're -- if

you're going to try simply to accommodate this extra

18 billion tons per year of C02 at a cost of -- call it $40

a ton -- that's an enormous amount of money. And the

question is can we afford the electricity that that

increase in cost would -- would provide us with? So

there's -- people suggested deep ocean, put it in coal

mines.


163

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

And then, of course, there's biology. And you've all

heard, you know, the guy who owns Virgin Airlines, Richard

Branson. He's offered a 25 million dollar prize if you can

figure out how to strip a billion tons of carbon dioxide

out of the atmosphere. Well, I have a solution, very easy,

called photosynthesis. And if you just simply plant the

state of South Dakota in switchgrass for a year, that will

take a billion tons out of the atmosphere. But remember,

that's 3 percent of the total we put in the atmosphere

every year. So it's a good idea. It's not likely to

happen very soon, unfortunately.

How about trees? This comes under the heading of one

of those really happy solutions to a problem. Trees take

carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. They make wood out

of it, and later you can cut the tree down and burn the

wood and start all over again. It's a wonderful thing to

do. So just how many trees will it take? And sort of the

bottom line is that to get to the point in 2030 when we've

increased this burning coal by 5 billion tons a year, we

will have had to plant 13,000 trees per second starting now

every second, day and night, of the year for 25 years just

to stay even. And, you know, that's -- that's a lot of

trees, and it would take about four times the land area of

the United States to accommodate those trees. It's a great

solution, but it's not gonna do it for us.


164

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Then, of course, biomass fuels, we all talked a lot of

about ethanol. We've read about it. Frankly, there's an

ethical question about using good agricultural land anc

fresh water to grow fuel to put in your SUV. But there

are -- there are ways to make ethanol from waste biomass

products, from waste paper, sugar cane bagasse. It's

expensive, but it's -- it will get better. We will be able

to use ethanol at least for a fraction of our

transportation fuel needs. How much? Maybe 10 to 20

percent, I would hope. But I don't think it's gonna be

much more than that just from the waste biomass technology.

Anyway, go on with that.

Biodiesel I currently like very much. And when I

resigned from being dean and I spent a year trying to

figure out what we were gonna do about energy, ethanol had

a number of problems. One was relatively low energy

density. And biodiesel looked good. But it's -- it

confronts many of the same problems that ethanol does.

Mainly, you don't want to plant a lot of good agricultural

land, like we're doing with corn to make ethanol now, which

is kind of a scandal, in -- in something that makes fuel.

It's not a great idea. Population's growing. We don ' t

want people starving to death because of our greed for

filling our SUVs.

The best plant in the land, actually, is an oil palm.


165

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

It's a lot better than seed crops. But even for the oil

palm, the best land plant, it would take all of Oahu and

Kauai covered in oil palm to provide our ground

transportation fuel in Hawai'i alone. So it may make a

difference, but it's ecologically not a great idea.

I'm going to skip through this fairly quickly because

my time is running short.

But the point about algae is they're kind of the Holy

Grail of the biodiesel world simply because algae reproduce

so fast and produce so much biomass in such a short time

compared to land plants and that if you can find a way to

grow them rapidly, you can extract the oil, which is about

30 percent by weight, and you actually you can use the rest

of the biomass remaining for energy production by making

biogas. And so -- so the actual net energy after you put

all of the costs of planting and -- planting and building

and doing all the work or operations you need, the relative

net energy for biodiesel from algae, if you include the

biogas produced from the remainder of the biomass, is about

100 times that of the best land plants for biodiesel and

for -- frankly, for ethanol.

So more capitally intensive. You have to build ponds.

This is Mauna Laia. It's a kind of a mock-up. This hasn't

happened. We would like it to, see it happen, of course.

This is a little plant from which the oil and which the oil


166

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

is extracted from the algae. This is the power plant. It

feeds you carbon dioxide, which is one of the best things

that algae do. They love concentrated carbon dioxide.

They absorb it all. They take the nitrous oxides out of

the effluent gas from the power plant. They feed you back

something you can actually burn in the power plant again,

so the carbon could actually be burned several times rather

than just once or twice. It's a wonderful way to reduce

002 in the atmosphere.

And then quickly, this is my personal opinion. The --

what can the government do? Well, I think a revenue

neutral tax on gas guzzlers, just exactly as Jeff

described, where the Hummers cost a lot more, and the

benefits from -- to the people who buy gas -- buy efficient

cars actually come from the overage that people pay for the

Hummers, I think instead of offering incentives to its

agencies, the State needs to mandate energy retrofits of

the government buildings. Just do it. Don't -- you know,

don't try to make it pretty for them. Just tell them they

have to do it. Solar water heating on all new

construction, it's a slam dunk. Tax gasoline, but make it

revenue neutral so that people who do take the bus actually

can save -something on their income tax as well as not

having to pay for expensive gas. There's a much longer

list. Outlaw incandescent light bulbs. Forget about it.


167

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Don't try to give people incentives. Those are -- those

are the issues that all focus on conservation right now.

In the long-term, the fuel issues, how we drive our

cars or our ships or our trains is still going to rely on

finding a renewable fuel that succeeds in avoiding

occupying agricultural land and destroying potential food

sources in the future. I like algae. Of course, we

started a company to make it work, and we're working very

hard on that, and we have significant negotiations now with

people who want to do this. So I think it is the wave of

the future. How much land does it take? If you supplied

all the diesel fuel needs for the United States, it would

take the -- about one-third of the Gadsen Purchase lands.

And I hope you all remember geography from the fifth grade

when you learned about the Gadsen Purchase. It's not a lot

of land. It looks like a lot, but it's really all that

much.

Thanks very much.

This little thing right here -- my favorite website is

Google Earth. That's Lake Tahoe. If it's a hundred meters

deep, all the oil the world will ever burn will fit in that

little blue spot. It's a wonderful thing to think about,

isn't it? All these wars we fight over something that fits

into a small little space like that. Well, anyway, that's

energy density. Thank you very much.


161

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

THE MODERATOR; Thanks a lot, Barry.

OPTIONS AND STRATEGIES FOR CONTROLLING GHG EMISSIONS

Q u e s t i o n and Answer S e s s i o n

THE MODERATOR; Okay. We've got questions -- for

those of you who weren't here this morning, in the back' of

your packet there are these green sheets for questions.

And there are folks in the aisles or on the sides that are

collecting these. We'11 go through as many as we can.

We'll take them in order, so it's first come, first served.

First question is for Brian Kealoha. You suggested

turning lights off when not in the room. If the lights are

needed frequently, does it save electricity to frequently

turn off and on lights, or does it actually use more

electricity.

MR. KEALOHA; Yeah, that's a myth that's been out

there for quite a while. It's actually -- if you're not --

if the lamp isn't on, you're not using electricity, so you

should turn if off when you're not in the room. The

only -- the only thing that comes into play there is with

fluorescent lamps you want to make sure that the burn

hours -- you can reduce the life of the lamp, but there is

ballasts out there that acknowledge that. So the general

rule of thumb is if you're not in the room and you're not


169

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

using the space, turn out the light.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Brian.

For saltwater -- this is for David. For saltwater

air-conditioning, what is the seawater pipe diameter and

length and depth, and what type of public hearing or EIS

process will be involved with seawater air-conditioning?

MR. REZACHEK: Well, we're limited on the seawater

pipe to a about 63-inch diameter pipe. That's pretty much

the state of the art for high density polyethylene and for

the suction limits on the pipe. We're gonna -- that type

of pipe would supply enough air-conditioning --

MR. HASHIRO: Could you speak into the microphone.

The mic, please.

That type of pipe would supply enough

air-conditioning for all the buildings in downtown or about

25,000 tons. Just to give you an idea of what a ton is,

it's an antiquated measure of one ton of ice melting over

24 hours. But say a hotel room might be half a ton, and

your average home might be 2 to 5 tons. That gives you an

idea of what a ton is.

DR. RALEIGH

MR. KEALOHA

pre

on

beg

Off

With respect to tl

pared a draft EIS.

the pumping station.

in the

ice of

e EIS

We ' re

cool

EIS process where

Planning and have

process, we

waiting to

ing station.

we wil

an EIS

' ve

get

already

some approval

and tt

actually

prep

go

notice

en that

to the

that th

wi

2y'

11

ve


170

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

already reviewed, but they're waiting for some information

on approval for that site.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, David.

This is for Jeff Mikulina. With the probability of an

increase in hurricanes, should we allow an increase in the

density for the population near the shoreline?

MR. MIKULINA: I don't know if I like this approach

where the questions don't come from the person. Don't you

get to see your accuser?

But it's a great question though, and that's something

that I don't know how much it's been discussed today.

Inevitably there are going to be consequences of globa..

climate change, and we're going to have to respond. The

IPCC environmental panel on climate change calls for an

approach called managed retreat from our coastlines. When

you think of the alternative, unmanaged retreat or letting

nature do it for us, it's much more attractive to have

policies in place where we build further away from the

coastline. This is something that, regardless of climate

change or not, it make senses both for recreation, for

visual beauty, for the -- just the environment itself. But

it will be more important, and we'll be working with the

legislature hopefully to increase our setbacks from the

coastline a couple hundred feet or at least in a way that

it's actually linked to the science of erosion. I'm sure


171

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Chip talked about that this morning, erosion-rate-based

setback. So it's not arbitrary. It's actually related to

what's happening in nature, and we need to get away from

the o c e a n .

THE MODERATOR: Actually, Chip said the beaches were

gonna be gone, and he was going to do a change of careers,

gonna become a groundwater hydroioglst because of the

increasing sea level.

This is for David. Isn't OTEC already available as a

technology and not 20 years in the future? And what's the

source of future energy eventually in the long term?

MR. REZACHEK: Well, as you can see from the -- one of

the slides I had, I think that OTEC probably has the

greatest promise for Oahu. Yes, OTEC is available now, but

it's not available in the hundred megawatt scale size. So

we need to probably do a 5 megawatt OTEC plant and then

scale up to a hundred megawatts from there. Certainly we

could accelerate that process. Virtually every component

in the system is off-the-shelf now. The only concern that

some people have is the pipe size, which has to be very

large. There are a number of developers out there who have

solutions to that, so I think, yes, it could be done much

sooner than 20 years, probably the next 10 years.

THE MODERATOR: And the second question was. What do

you think the long-term energy source is?


172

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

on

ng

give

MR. REZACHEK: Well, I think we need a mix of all

different energy sources. I don't think we can depend

any one source as we're doing right now. We're dependi

mainly on fossil fuels. We have to have a mix. You saw

the equivalencies of all the different technologies. 1

wasn't saying any particular -- any particular technology

was more important than the other. In fact, I would

promote the use of all those technologies, which would

us much more than 20 percent by 2020.

THE MODERATOR: Thank you.

Another one for Jeff; Why isn't population growth

being addressed since human beings are the cause of global

warming? And since population is growing exponentially,

all the source production will have to increase. Is the

energy, quote, renewable sources exponentially benefit

infinite.

MR. MIKULINA: Again, you know, that's an excellent

question. I don't know if it's — it hasn't probably been

addressed today, and it's not being addressed. That is,

the foundation of all of these issues is really population

growth. There is a glimmer of hope in that equation

though. Some of the predictions in the seventies we've

seen haven't come true. Some of the population curves

leveled off. In fact, some of the -- we'll say developed

countries -- Scandinavian countries, for example, are

have


173

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

actually experiencing negative population growth. Their

population pyramids are inversed so much so that the

government in Denmark is a little bit worried about their

future and a couple years ago had an ad campaign

encouraging couples to take the afternoon off and go home

and see what happens.

But no, it's certainly a concern because we're seeing

obviously a huge development, huge growth in population in

countries we'll call developing, and they all have a hunger

for the same sort of life-style that we're enjoying. So I

think our challenge is to have them leapfrog the painful

evolution we went through and hopefully get right to the

low carbon solutions that don't mean a lot of sacrifice but

are definitely different than what we've experienced.

But population is at the root of that. The Sierra

Club has a strong position on population growth. We have a

partnership with Planned Parenthood called Planet for the

Planet- And it certainly is, again, the big driver behind

most of these issues.

THE MODERATOR: So Sierra Club's not advocating people

take the afternoon -- couples take the afternoon off?

MR. KEALOHA: Well, go ahead and do so, but do it

wisely.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. This one's for Barry. The

problem with using trees as carbon sinks is they can burn,


174

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

returning C02 into the atmosphere. Climate change is

causing drier conditions in some regions. How is this

challenge being addressed?

DR. RALEIGH: If you step back from the microphone a

little bit, I have a trouble hearing you because of the

echo. Say it again.

THE MODERATOR: The problem with using trees — trees

as carbon sinks is they can burn -- or they can burn,

returning 002 to the atmosphere. Climate change is causing

drier conditions in some regions. How is this challenge

being addressed?

DR. RALEIGH: I don't know. Jeff, why don't you try

that.

MR. MIKULINA: Actually, I don't think Shanah has

responded yet.

DR. RALEIGH: Okay.

MS. TREVENNA: It's true.

It seems that that can be addressed thinking about

carbon credits in a way.

Of course. Somewhere my grandfather who's been

telling me to slow down for 30 years is smiling.

So it seems like there's two questions in there. But

with using trees as carbon sinks, when we -- I guess when

money is spent to offset your carbon use, it's now being

encouraged, but to go with -- use -- invest in renewable


175

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

energy. So that's one -- that's one thing we're turning

away from. But as far as actually absorbing carbon in

another way, I actually don't know another way besides

that. If -- does anyone else in the panel? Right. So I

guess the best you can do is if you're doing carbon oxiding

is to invest in renewable energy rather than replanting.

But it doesn't -- doesn't feel intuitive, I have to admit.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks Shanah.

Now this is for Barry again. Doesn't coal have

enormous social, labor, and environmental impacts other

than greenhouse gas emissions?

DR. RALEIGH; You'll have to tell me again. I'm

sorry. My hearing's not good.

THE MODERATOR; I said. Doesn't coal have enormous

social, labor, and environmental impacts other than

greenhouse gas emissions?

DR. RALEIGH; Oh. Yes.

THE MODERATOR: Thank you, Barry.

DR. RALEIGH; In a word, it's — in West Virginia

you -- some of the places you really don't want to go

anymore. It's a beautiful state. There is -- there is a

big environmental price to pay for mining coal at the rates

and volumes that we're mining it. It doesn't mean that it

isn't reparable, but it's a long time before it can

recover, the landscape can recover to something like a


176

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

normal landscape. What else are you gonna do I guess is

the issue. So nuclear power doesn't seem to be any more

palatable for a whole host of different reasons.

THE MODERATOR: Okay, On that note, this is for

Shanah. And I've asked her to speak slowly, and I won't do

it for 30 years. Do you see Sustainable Saunders as

extendable to the entire Manoa campus? Also, why aren'

all the buildings on campus metered, both for electricity

and water?

MS. TREVENNA: Thank you so much for asking that

question. I definitely believe Saunders should be a model.

The buildings are divided into different categories, so

there are some buildings that are labs that use actually a

bit more energy, but a lot of them are very similar to

Saunders, first of all.

And metering is the key, in my opinion. If we can

show communities the information they need to make

decisions in their lives, and if we can take the savings

that occur and put them into revolving fund that then is

invested back into the community, even -- either in the

form of incentives or in revolving funds for grants for

more sustainable projects, then the community actually has

in its hands the power and the incentive to make decisions.

So a metered building where that information is shown on a

daily basis -- you can walk in and see it on a screen or


177

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

kiosk -- would give people in the community a reason if

there's -- being able to see the energy data would give

people incentive, would give them the tool to know where

they're at and how their behavior can -- is reducing the

amount of energy use in their room or their floor.

If the money that they actually save goes back into

their hands, I think that's the most powerful way of

getting people to change their behavior. Once we show and

prove that behavior modification makes the impact that I

think it will, I think other buildings will adopt that, and

I think a dollar incentive will be one that other buildings

are excited about as well.

MR. MIKULINA: I'd like to add something else to that

as well because I think you're right on. And the other

portion of it is really the structure of these different

buildings. You know, the study that was done for

Sustainable Saunders pointed out a lot of opportunities

there for efficiency. But how do we get -- how do we move

forward on that? And the first part of that is looking at

the longer range benefits of being, you know, more

efficient and more renewable and appropriating those funds

for the longer term, which will include also the metering

so people can see behaviorally what they're doing, coupled

with the infrastructure of the building, will really help

making Saunders really a demonstration model for the rest


178

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

of the campus that can be easily employed.

THE MODERATOR; Good. Thanks. Thanks very much.

This is for anybody on the panel. Rumor has it that

all of the recyclable material -- all recycling materials

are burned or shipped off island ostensibly to the third

world -- to third world landfills. What happens when we

drop a bottle in the blue bin? If it ends up in the power

plant what's the point?

MR. MIKULINA: I don't know why you're looking at 'me.

Seventeen percent of Americans also believe in alien

abduction.

But it is true we do recycle offshore. Most of the

recycling happens either in China or in California, anc

we're probably not going to see any heavy recycling

industry here. Most of that stuff though is shipped. It's

not sent to H-Power, regardless of what the current mayor

is suggesting, that incineration is recycling. True

recycling is taking place, albeit in California or

elsewhere. There are -- there are other issues obviously

surrounding recycling plastics, recycling aluminum. It's

energy intensive, and there's probably other moral

questions about who is actually doing the work, but that's

the situation that we're in now.

But it does save energy. I think the calculation s

about 5,000 bottles or cans is about a ton of energy or


179

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

greenhouse gas savings. There's a minor cost for shipping,

but the marine cost, these boats are going back largely

empty anyways, so it's not that large in the equation. But

chat's the current situation we have. Recycling is still

far beneficial than throwing it in our landfill or

incinerators.

THE MODERATOR: The person with this handwriting must

be Jeff's straight person because it was another question.

I was wondering if you would talk more about the structural

and institutional barriers to change, like corporations or

racism or class or corporate-owned media. You mentioned

Wal-Mart, for example.

MR. MIKULINA: Okay. How much time do we have?

Wal-Mart's a great example, actually. And we beat up

on them for a lot of reasons, rightfully, but they're the

big, hundred pound gorilla. They contracted with Rocky

Mountain Institute to look at how they can save some

energy. One of the impacts is they move so many goods.

This is a company that does what, 300 billion dollars in

revenue a year. They move so many goods across the country

that just small changes to their trucks, putting on

baffling on the semi-trucks to make them more aerodynamic,

saves them a huge amount of money.

Similarly, on their products that they sell side, as

soon as they started carrying compact fluorescents and


180

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

promoting those, you reached a whole 'nother spectrum of

the audience that Sierra Club probably isn't gonna reach

and maybe some of the folks here even have difficulty

reaching because they don't spend a lot of time at

Wal-Mart. So in that way they can be huge change agent's-

Structural and other problems, yeah, everywhere.

Again, these barriers, it's not -- it doesn't take a rocket

scientist to realize some of the barriers that exist that

prevent people from doing the right thing.

One story, it's kind of stale now, but about five

years ago there was a clear institutional barrier at the

Department of Education here. Someone can correct me if

I'm going astray, but they wanted to do daylighting in

of the schools. They showed, as Shanah talked about,

daylighting is great for a lot of reasons, lower energy

costs. They've even shown higher test scores in schools

when people had natural light. But as soon as they went

out and tried to do this, the Department of Education came

back and said. We have a rule of no holes in our roof,

we can't do daylighting. And it was a rule that was

written down somewhere probably for expense reasons at

point in time, but it was a huge hurdle, and it prevented a

very good idea from taking root, and I don't know if that

ever got resolved.

But those are some barriers that can make doing the

some

so

some


181

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

right thing very difficult. There's infinite others, but

it would take all afternoon.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. We'll give Jeff a break.

I think this is probably for Brian. Is there a

problem recycling or disposing of compact fluorescent

lights?

MR. KEALOHA: That's probably the biggest issue that

we've found, that California.-- Canada's looking into that.

It's the same thing that's coming up in California, that

there is a mercury content within compact fluorescent

lamps. And are we ready to handle, if we were to outlaw

incandescents, the amount of recycling that would be

required? So it is an issue. I guess with every good

thing there's a little bit of bad. They are beginning --

you know, manufacturers are moving forward and putting in

low mercury lamps to try to get around this problem. But

as it exists today, if you were to outlaw a technology

completely, you would have some recycling issues.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Brian.

This one's for Barry. It's about algae for biofuels.

Would you use local algae, native or local algae? Would

you use -- would it be genetically modified? And how would

you keep it separate from native species if it is imported

or modified?

DR. RALEIGH: Well, at least in our own case, we're


182

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

not -- we're not using anything except for very normal

algae that -- the species that we've used so far actually

come -- were collected in Hawai'i.

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory actually

sponsored a program back in the eighties for producing

biodiesel or diesel feedstock from algae. And it was a

huge program, 25 million dollars. They collected algae, a

lot from warm climates because they seem to do better here,

as you -- if you have a swimming pool, you well know. And

consequently, that collection, subsequent to the closing of

the program, actually has arrived -- has been at the

University of Hawai'i. So we had access to ail the algae

that were collected at that time. And the ones we're using

right now that we're screening have come from Hawai'i

itself. But there are others -- there are others that have

come from other states or other places and sort of the

subtropical United States that hopefully could be useful in

the future.

We have not developed, nor are we working on

developing, a gene-spliced organism. And a GMO -- the GMO

is an inaccurate description for what you do, but what it

really means is it's a chimera. You take genetic material

from some other organism and stuff it into another one, and

you -- you develop a creature that you're nervous about

because you don't know what it might do. And we -- we re


183

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

not doing that. That's kind of a no-no. Just -- it avoids

too many -- it raises too many problems, and we're just not

gonna do it-

THE MODERATOR: Thanks, Barry.

This is addressed to Shanah, but I think it could be

Shanah or Jeff. It's questionable that the present

generation of leaders are going to be able to reverse

global warming. Our best hope may be the world's youth.

What do you feel is the best way to get them involved in

positive action?

MS. TREVENNA: There's a quote from a student in

California who's 25, and he said. It's no longer time for

empty protests and frustration and anger. It's just time

to step up and do every small thing we can to make a

difference. And it seems to be what's echoing across

campuses, that there are student leaders on every campus

that are rising up in a way that we -- that's different

from the sixties. We're united through the Internet and

through MySpace, that sort of technology. We all have cell

phones. We can reach each other. We are able to travel to

see each other and get together. And the vibe is really

constructive.

So I think that, you know, even in the U-N.'s

step-by-step protest to evolve a community, they say the

first thing to do is to unite the fire souls, and those are


184

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the people that just are really passionate. And when they

find each other, it's almost like a little cluster of

light. They create a beacon and somehow -- I've only

been -- I moved here from Canada in August, and already

we've formed a large student group on campus called the

HUB, standing for "help us bridge," not watch us protest.

You know, it's a different -- it's a different energy. So

it's happening really, really, really fast by -- I would

say the only thing that needs to happen on campuses is

we get given the green light as much as possible. Ever

that

time that happens, it seems to be really, really successful

and move quickly. The only time there's ever a lag is when

there's a rule, kind of like Jeff was talking about.

For instance, why don't we have solar on every roof on

the campus? There's one small rule in procurement that

we're working on right now to figure out. So it's only

when we're blocked. So I would say allow the students to

unite, allow them to communicate and travel to see each

other and give them the green light as much as possible.

MR. MIKULINA: Let me follow up. You mentioned this

current generation of leaders, and I think the underlying

thought behind that is that we somehow have these leaders

that will be in there for the next number of years, and we

forget that we're fortunate that we live in this democracy

where in the next two to four years we can have a whole


185

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

brand new set in every level of government. So it's really

up to the people, up to us to select those leaders.

I think with this issue things are happening so

quickly, there's just, like I said, a sea change, support

that's growing behind this issue, and particularly through

young people looking at the future and seeing how this is

going.to impact their lives in a dramatic way. I think

it's going to be just controlling that flood of interest

and getting the right people in office.

Just as a side note, I've been going around giving a

talk -- I see some other people in the room -- the Gore

talk of the Inconvenient Truth presentation, given it about

20 times. Two audiences stand out as being the best by

far. One was the Kahala Nui senior center. It was an

afternoon talk, and it was an hour of a hundred percent

attention, a lot of incredible questions, just really

involved, great. I don't know if it was the medications

that day or what, but it was impressive. Their questions

were. What can we do about it? I'm 85 years old. What can

I possibly do? Give us money.

The earlier one was Punahou School, and it was the

sophomore class at Punahou School right before lunch, and I

was dreading it because I remember being a sophomore in

high school, and the last thing I want is some dude giving

a Power Point- But it was fascinating. I mean, the


186

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

questions that were asked were beyond me, just all eyes

glued. And it was kind of taken back. Steve Meeter

[phonetic], who some people might know, his son was

actually in the audience, and I didn't realize it, and

later Steve told me that his son brought up the talk and

said. This guy was talking about climate change. We get it

already. Just tell us what to do. So that was kind of

encouraging that, you know, no longer do we have to be

going through the charts and talking about the science.

They get it. What do you do next? What's the next step?

What are the best solutions? How can we be effective? So

that's how they respond.

MS. TREVENNA: I just have to quickly agree with that.

Never in one conversation with any of the student groups on

campus has there had to be a debate whether climate change

is real or not. So we're just starting on a unified

platform of let's just get something done in any way

possible. And no one has lost steam. These students have

taken on projects because we use that whole pull philosophy

of push, and we really try to reposition sustainability as

something that's fun, something that's really progressive

and -- and even one of our logos is Sustainability Is Sexy,

which got a whole article written up in the paper when

someone wore one of our T-shirts on the Big Island and got

questioned about where that T-shirt came from. Just make


187

1

2

3

4

5

6

. 7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

it fun, and just

to be involved in

MR.

to that.

MIKULINA

I mean.

youth can really

consider

those of

daughter

off the

let them loose. It's

and to watch.

: And if I could add

obviously, what you're

effect change, and it

ourselves, I guess, the older

you who do have kids, you know

says something

.ights, I

behaviors of the

mean.

to you like qui

they can help a

generations that maybe

And so it gets back to

do to ma

starts.

ke a difference

teaching them wh

really a

one more

hearing

fun process

dimension

here, the

can affect

generation

if your

what we

because

son or your

t smoking

Iso chan

aren't

at do th

ge

as

ey

2ir turn

the

aware.

need to

, and that's where it really all

appl

just

enga

THE MODERATOR: Thank

Let's give them a big

ause .

We're going to

-- I'm gonna h

gement on the B

Volcano. I'd just

take a

ave to

you fc

round.

break

leave.

ig Island, so

like to

great audience. Everybody

the

over

speakers for a great d

-- I'm going to turn

(Whereupon, a

3:00 p.m. Dr.

recess

Terry

thank

stuck

Iks.

a

in

I

hand, a big

a minute.

round of

I will

had a previous

I'm going -- I

the audience f

with it. And

ay. So I m going to

'm going to

or being a

thank all

turn it back

it over to Terry during break.

was taken

Surles is

from 2:46 p

now acting

.m. to

as


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

The Moderator.)

THE MODERATOR: Okay. If everybody could have their

seat, we're getting into the home stretch. And we have

three speakers and then some final closing remarks from the

folks from Hawaiian Electric. And while everybody's

sitting down, because -- because Mike Hamnett had a prior

engagement at a toga party, as for those of you who

remember me from this morning, I'm Terry Surles from Hawaii

Natural Energy Institute. So with that, I think we'll get

underway.

Carl Freedman -- again, all the biographies are in the

back of the materials you all have received. Carl Freedman

is the first speaker. Carl.

INCORPORATING CLIMATE CHANGE INTO THE IRP PROCESS

HOW DOES THE REGULATORY PROCESS WORK WITH GREENHOUSE GAS?

Mr. Carl Freedman, Hai)cu Design and Analysis

MR. FREEDMAN: Hello everyone. Can you hear me oliay?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Aloha.

MR. FREEDMAN: I was having a little trouble hearing.

I'll give my sympathy here to the court reporter. It was

challenging for me. If somebody can't hear, just give me a

little wave back there.

I'm going to keep my comments focused on a very narrow


189

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

aspect of all of this, and I'm also going to treat it in a

cursory manner, so things should be concise, I hope. I'm

going to focus on Act 226, which is the house greenhouse

emissions bill, and I'm going to focus on the interaction

that that has with the Integrated Resource Plan process and

the utilities in particular.

House Bill 226, as I understand it, has not been

signed by the governor, but we don't know that it will be.

It doesn't have an act number, yet so I'm just going to

call it House Bill 226 for now, but it's our greenhouse

emissions bill. It sets out a very clear policy about

greenhouse emissions. We're gonna -- Hawai'i is to reduce

emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. As far as

policy goes, that's about as clear as you can get. It sets

out a process and some criteria that describe how that

policy is gonna be implemented.

The criteria are to divide -- to determine the maximum

practically and technically feasible and cost-effective

reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and it identifies a

process that forms a task force that is to prepare reports

and recommendations to the legislature to -- for analysis

and gather information and ultimately, by the year 2012,

after this has been perhaps acted on further by the

legislature and rules have been drafted by the Department

of Health, should result in some sort of mandates and


190

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

rules.

Now to some of us in the IRP process, who have been in

the IRP process, some of these elements and approach seem

rather familiar. We're starting with a policy. In the IRP

process we start with identifying what the objectives are

and what the criteria we're going to use to determine what

resource mix or what plans will be selected, and then

there's an information-gathering phase where we look at

demand forecasts and supply options and demand-side

management options. There's an analysis section where

we're doing some analysis. And ultimately, there's a

recommendation made about a plan, and then it goes on for

review by decision-making and then implementation. So

there's some parallel approach here in terms of policy

then analysis, decision-making, and implementation.

And, of course, there are some differences that I

to highlight. First of all, the state policy in Act 226 is

regarding reductions in all sectors. And the IRP process,

of course, involves the utility sector. And, of course, we

know that a substantial portion of greenhouse emissions are

other than utility. Act -- or House Bill 226 also

addresses greenhouse gases in particular with consideration

of other factors whether -- where IRP addresses a whole

list of factors, one of which may be greenhouse gases.

The venues are different. The statewide process is

and

want


191

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

gonna be done by a task force, and decisions will be made

ultimately by the legislature and the Department of Health

and rule-making whereas the IRP process is the utility

process implemented by the utilities, and ultimately

decisions are made by the PUC. But these -- these

similarities and differences are important to understand

the relationships between House Bill 226 and the IRP

process.

So I want to talk about a few ideas, and I don't want

to pretend to have done any exhaustive -- exhaustive

analysis of all of this. In preparation for this, I read

the statute carefully and scratched my head and thought

about what I knew about the IRP process. But I haven't

actually talked to very many people out there about what --

how this all may spin out. And in my experience, really,

that's that you have to do to figure out how things are

gonna work, is to get a lot of people's ideas. So I feel

like I'm talking a little blind. So maybe some of you will

take me up in the questions and enlighten me about some of

this.

But here are some thoughts. I think it's clear that

House Bill 226 eventually may provide some specific

mandates to the IRP process and to the utilities, but we're

not there yet. Right now HB 226 has established a policy,

and although that policy is very clear, it still does not


192

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

get to any specific mandates that need to be met by utility

sector. It has policy, criteria, and a process, but th

analysis section and the decision-making and the rules

are -- they're still gonna happen. So in terms of the

short term, we have -- we have no clear mandate to the PUC

or no clear mandate to the utilities as to do anything

particular in particular now. An example, the state

policy, of course, is a statewide mandate, but it has not

been determined what percentage of that will be met by the

utility sector.

In the near term, I think one thing Integrated

Resource Planning can do is inform the task force, I mean,

regarding that particular issue. How should reductions be

allocated to the different sectors? And a corollary

question that you have to ask is. What is the cost of unit

production by sector? You know, is it cheaper for the

utilities to reduce greenhouse gases than it is for the

transportation sector? Or how much reduction can be

obtained in these different sectors? Those are questions

that the task force needs to answer. And I think the

Integrated Resource Planning process can inform that

decision. The -- it's an optimization type of analysis

where you look -- you can look at different scenarios. You

can figure out if we were to do this, it would cost that

much. You can provide information that way that could be


193

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

valuable to -- to the task force.

So basically I guess what I'm trying to get across

here is I think that Integrated Resource Planning is a good

venue for analysis. It provides a lot of good information.

Integrated Resource Planning is also a venue for

implementation and enforcement. And regarding House Bill

226, I think the first role it has to play, I'm suggesting,

would be to provide some information to the process,

provide information to the task force. And ultimately,

when the task force has something to say about -- about

that reductions must be taken into account, then Integrated

Resource Planning process -- it would be an effective way

to implement that.

I want to talk a little more particularly now about

greenhouse gases in the IRP process itself. And I -- I

want to make the point right off that I'm throwing some

ideas out there. There are a lot of different ways this

could go, and certainly the Public Utilities Commission has

an enormous amount of discretion about this. The PUC could

sit in the back seat on this issue until it has to do

something, or the utility -- or the Commission could be a

real policy driver. Without any further requirement by the

legislature, the PUC could push the issue. That's up to

them, similarly with the utility. The utility doesn't have

quite as much discretion as the PUC. They have to do what


194

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the PUC says in most cases, but the PUC -- but the utility

can push this process along. I mean, we're all here today

at the initiative of the utility, as I understand it, to

look at this issue.

So in the IRP process we start with the objectives and

the criteria that we're gonna -- that are used to evaluate

plans. And those -- those objectives are usually

identified by the utility. And they have always included

gas emissions, and I think carbon emissions have been

identified as a list of criteria along with cost,

minimizing cost, reliability, environmental impact,

economic effects, a whole list of criteria.

And one thing is I think the Commission also could

step in and identify some objectives. In fact, in the IRP

framework it explicitly says that the Commission can

identify specific objectives at the beginning of the IRP

process. I don't think it's ever done this explicitly. I

haven't seen the most recent orders that have come out so

I don't know if they have in the most recent round.

The other -- the other aspect of objectives and

criteria is that they can be — they can either be things

to be optimized in the process, like which one of these are

the cheapest, or which has the least environmental effect,

or how much can we reduce carbon emissions? They can also

be stated as specifications. In other words, all plans


195

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

will meet these specifications. Like system reliability is

treated that way, for example. All the plans that are

looked at in IRP provide reliable service to all the

customers.

And, you know, greenhouse gas emissions, if they

become a mandate, could graduate from something to be

optimized to something that's simply specified. All the

plans will meet the greenhouse emissions targets that are

set by whomever in the future when those are -- when those

are set.

And similarly, in the IRP process we can look at

different scenarios. We've looked at many different types

of definitions of candidate plans or scenarios to meet

particular things. You know, what wouid happen if we were

to maximize the use of renewables? How much would that

cost? approaches like that to answer questions. And

certainly one thing, and perhaps in the next round of IRP

or as a separate study parallel to the IRP or using the IRP

tool -- analysis tools, that type of information could be

looked at to aid the task force. How much will it cost per

unit of reduction using various of those strategies? And

along that line, even aside from the IRP process, the

utility, using some of the IRP tools, could address

specific questions.

And the last -- the last specific part of the IRP


196

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

framework -- I mean, there's part of the IRP framework says

that all utility plans shall comport with normally adopted

state and county plans. I mean, it sounds like I'm

reciting that verbatim. That's a. paraphrase, And the PUC

has not felt compelled in the past to obey policies unless

it's mandatory. But clearly if 226 graduates to the point

of being mandatory, it's clear that the IRP framework would

follow any mandates on the state and county level.

So in addition to the IRP process, the Public

Utilities Commission could open a separate investigative

docket. I'm not recommending anything here. I'm just kind

of going through options. And actually, there are some

things that could happen outside of the PUC's jurisdiction,

I want to mention, that wouldn't be done by the PUC. One

example, I know a number of people have talked about carbon

taxes. And one option that we explored in a study for the

forum was to take the existing taxes on utilities that are

on revenues and take the same amount of taxation, you know,

revenue neutral, but denominate it by carbon. So you take

the same amount of money, but instead of per dollar, it's

per amount of carbon. And that amounts to about 1.1 cents

per kilowatt hour. So you'd be shifting -- you'd be giving

an incentive then to non-carbon-emitting solutions of about

a penny, little over a penny a kilowatt hour.

And I think the moderator's walking. I've got one


197

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

minute.

I guess the last thing I want to leave you all with, I

have it down here as "just worms" as the last topic, as the

last topic. I feel sometimes talking about greenhouse gas

issues that we're on a veneer of analysis that's suspended

over a huge can of worms. And I think Henry pointed out,

made some good points about the need to look at some

details of the analysis. You need to look at details. And

if you just say emissions and you just look at tail pipes

and smokestacks and you don't dig any deeper, you may not

look deep enough to make sure that we're really doing

something constructive about global warming. You do need

to look at details, and I think this is gonna be a

challenge to the legislators, a challenge to the agency

administrators and the PUC to look at enough details for

the analysis to be meaningful, and yet if you really look

at the details and you dig deep enough, it's very difficult

not to get into a whole morass of details about how -- how

do you scope out the limits of all the different things?

How far do you take the impacts of carbon back to the mine

mouth or back to the workers in Indiana? Or, you know, how

far do you push the scope of this analysis? And I think

the challenge to the regulators is to look at the details

to get meaningful analysis, but don't get mired and lose

sight of the prize, which is to really -- really implement


198

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

some forward-looking policy. Thank you.

THE MODERATOR: Thank you, Carl. And thank you for

being timely, too.

And now for a man who needs no introduction, because

he was introduced this morning, John Tantlinger.

HOW DOES THE STATE GOVERNMENT PLAY A ROLE?

Dr. John Tantlinger, DBEDT

DR. TANTLINGER: Well, hello again, and let's see if I

can get this up.

For anyone that was not here for my presentation t'his

morning, thank you very much for joining us this afternoon.

For those of you who were here for my presentation this

morning, thank you very much for joining us again this

afternoon. This is just as tough a crowd as it was this

morning.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yea.

DR. TANTLINGER; Actually, you know, I'11 be very

honest. I wasn't even prepared to do a Power Point

presentation this afternoon, but Henry Curtis inspired

In fact, I'll be brutally honest. I had not even prepared

this afternoon's presentation, but I'd given it

considerable anxious thought. And the name of the panel is

Incorporating Climate Change Into the IRP Process, and my

me.


199

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

presentation was invited to provide comments on the

question. How does the state government play a role?

And I'd been considering talking with you about how

the state statutes assign different state agencies, you

know, their various missions and functions that would

support the state government's various roles in energy and

in BUS and IRP; and, for example, the Public Utilities

Commission as the quasi-judicial regulatory and

decision-making body; the Consumer Advocate's role of being

the representative of the ratepayers' interest in

regulatory proceedings and so forth; and those agencies and

other agencies, how they take their mission and functional

guidance on climate change and greenhouse gas policies from

any related laws that the legislature or even the federal

government might enact. And then assuming DBEDT would have

a role under those statutes, because of DBEDT's existing

statutory role with the Director as their state energy

resources coordinator, DBEDT would then also do its part in

implementing that policy guidance.

Then, as I was walking back to the office at lunchtime

from this morning's session, I had what I've heard referred

to in the past as a BFO -- a BFO, that's Bravo, Foxtrot,

Oscar -- a blinding flash of the obvious. And, you know,

maybe it's just my age. Maybe it's my memory going, but

state agencies actually are and have been involved in


200

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

attempting to incorporate greenhouse gas reduction policies

into the IRP process for quite some time. And from this

point, what I'll do is be speaking about this from DBEDT's

perspective.

DBEDT's participated in all of the utility IRP

processes since IRP was adopted in this state. And DBEDT,

along with several other energy stakeholders, some of whom

are here today, advocated for and participated in the

development of Hawai'i's IRP framework. Since that time

our agency's primary role has been to assess, analyze,

provide information or recommendations and aims

specifically at encouraging and influencing the Hawai'i

utility, the utility IRPs, to comport with, as Carl said,

Hawai'i's state energy policy objectives, because that's

consistent with the IRP framework. And even absent IRP,

these state energy policy objectives are state law.

So this morning I presented background on the state's

greenhouse gas inventory estimates project. And then I

also showed you the findings of our recent preliminary

recalculation of those emission estimates. And what I

didn't cover this morning though were some of the outcomes

that might be directly or indirectly attributed to that

project as well as the phase two component of that project

where a variety of recommendations were contained to reduce

greenhouse gas emissions in the Climate Change Action Plan


201

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

that was developed. In the interest of time, and frankly,

because I did run out of time putting this together, I'm

only gonna touch on a few. And I look forward to more

discussion after the panel presentations.

First, the greenhouse gas inventory project spanning

1994 to 1998 was a DBEDT initiative. But it became a

strategic partnership with DOH, UH Environmental Center,

DLNR, Department of Agriculture, PUC, counties and numerous

others. At the time only 12 other states had developed

greenhouse gas inventory estimates. And as I mentioned,

the two grants that we received from the EPA were

competitive awards. So Hawai'i's proposals had to compete

against several other states for the funding. DBEDT's

role -- and it has been and it continues to be one of

coordination, analysis, information, and initiatives to

develop and propose energy policy and planning initiatives

and advocate projects that have been evaluated and found to

be supportive of those state energy policy objectives.

And I think that the state's energy program,

particularly under Maurice Kaya's leadership, has done its

best to itself be a leader in these areas. And this means,

however -- you know, leadership means understanding one's

limitations and cooperating with others in order to

leverage their strengths and leverage their actions. An

example of that was how the greenhouse gas inventory


202

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

project and the climate change action plan recommended

adding greenhouse gas reduction language to Hawai'i state

laws. However, getting that recommendation adopted was

something that actually took a great deal of cooperativt

effort and ultimately then the decision by the legislature

and the governor. And the result is shown on this and the

next slide thereafter.

In 2002 the legislature did enact a change to the

Hawaii Revised Statutes. Chapter 226-l8(a) easily state's

energy policy objectives, and you note up here -- if I can

get the pointer -- planning for state facility systems with

regard to energy be directed toward achievement of the

following objectives given due consideration to all. This

is one them: reducing, avoiding, sequestration of

greenhouse gas emissions from energy supply and use.

And this is a summary of the next level of detail in

that statute. And you can see them down here. These were

also adopted in 2002. This was just one of the

recommendations in the DOH/DBEDT Climate Change Action

Plan, development of which was due to the participation of

all those others stated. DBEDT's analytic review and

comments on Hawai'i utility IRPs from the very -- from the

time this began, these policy and policy objectives are

among the criteria that we use when we look at our IRPs and

provide comments back.


203

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Paraphrasing one of the speakers this morning, results

don't necessarily get accomplished by mandates, especially

when the mandates are not adequately funded. Now that's a

fact. But on the other hand, when it comes to changing

behavior in a society and an economy based on the rule of

law, I think it's at least a good place to start.

Now I've been with the state energy program for nearly

20 years. Prior to the greenhouse gas inventory project

and an enactment of these statutes, I don't recall

greenhouse gas emission estimates ever appearing in the

utilities' analyses of their own resource options in their

own plans. So from DBEDT's perspective, our role of

analysis, information, coordination, and development of

partnerships within the ER -- within the IRP process to

advance these objectives, I think they appear to be -- it

appears to be a useful role. It's important to emphasize

that our role includes in these partnerships the utilities

themselves. Because our perspective really is that our

constituencies, our customers, if you will, really

encompass all the energy stakeholders in the state, we

believe that it's consistent with the role that's been

designated to the Department and to the energy program

under the structure of the law that outlines the ERC's

functions and responsibilities.

Now in 2006 several very important energy laws were


204

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

enacted. Again, in the nearly 20 years Maurice and I have

been with the state energy program, this energy legisla

was absolutely the most comprehensive ever. And those

tion

laws

reflect, we think, pretty much in some form the majority of

the energy -- the administration's energy policy proposal

in 2006. That was labeled Energy for Tomorrow. Prior to

that, the RPS law was also something that DBEDT played

part in. And many of these policies directly relate to

utility IRP processes, and to the extent that they reduce

greenhouse gases, they certainly relate.

Again, using greenhouse gas and carbon emissions as a

method of assessment, we did a conservative estimate of

what the governor's policy initiative would have produced

by the year 2020 in terms of benefits. And you can see

here that this is one of the major focus of that effort.

We think that the laws that were enacted in 2006 can

achieve similar benefits as you see estimated here as long

as they're implemented effectively and adequately

resourced.

Now — so from the State's — from DBEDT's

perspective, the State's role in IRP is to advance these

policies and other policies that relate that are passed by

the legislature, and we will continue, to the extent that

we are able and so chartered, to participate in the IRP

advisory process and other processes to advance those


205

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

policy objectives.

So, again, thank you very much for this opportunity to

speak with you. And again, thanks to HECO for inviting

DBEDT. Thank you.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks, John.

And now Darren Kimura is here, who's agreed to

summarize all the preceding 14 talks with his. Only

kidding, Darren. So Darren Kimura from Energy Industries.

WHAT KINDS OF THINGS CAN U T I L I T I E S BE DOING?

Mr. Darren Kimura, Energy Industries

MR. KIMURA: Okay. Let's see here. Can

everybody hear me okay?

Just a little bit of background on myself, I've been

doing energy in Hawai'i for about 14 years now, so a lot of

what we've done has been in efficiency. We've also done

some renewable energy development. But aside of that,

we've also done a lot of projects with utilities from

across --

THE MODERATOR: Darren, because we do have — sorry.

We do have a court recorder here, you got to slow down.

MR. KIMURA; Slow down. So I'm speaking faster than

she was.

Okay. But the point that I was trying to make with


206

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

that is we have a lot of other experiences with other

utilities -- still too fast -- with other utilities across

the country as well as internationally. So my task was to

try and summarize what utility -- what kinds of things that

utilities can be doing to help prevent greenhouse gases,

and that is big task. That's quite a challenge. Now being

that we've sat through 14 different discussions already,

I'm gonna assume that you're all experts on the cause of

greenhouse gases and what's been -- what's going on out

there. So I'm not going to talk about any of that stuff in

my presentation here.

So what I wanted to do was really summarize it as four

major categories that utilities -- what utilities can be

doing to help combat greenhouse gases. Now, of course,

this is a big topic. Quite frankly, this is gigantic. And

there's a lot of different things: carbon sequestration,

different things with scrubbers. I've decided not to talk

about any of that, so I'm pretty much going to be focussing

on the support of clean green energy.

The four topics are projects, green power pricing

renewable energy certificates, and the feed-in tariff; on

the utility side, power purchase agreement and

interactions; on the education side, consumer outreach'; and

in investment, projects and companies. But at the core of

these four major things comes back to one major topic. and


207

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

that's corporate transparency, letting us know what

utilities — not necessarily just Hawaiian Electric, but

utilities in general are trying to do, want to do, and will

allow us to do with them.

So the first thing that I did here was really kind of

identify what other utilities are doing out there. I took

a look at the Energy Information Agency and really found

that most utilities are doing something with regards to

green power selling.

Here's an example of a utility in Seattle, Seattle

City Light, where they have two major programs. One

program is called Green Up. That program allows consumers

to purchase green power, a percentage of green power

monthly for a fixed cost. That monthly charge then goes

back to a renewable energy developer to help them offset

the additional cost of producing power with their renewable

energy resource, whether it be wind or solar, geothermal or

other. So this additional cost that is on top of your

existing bill helps to incentivize other green projects to

occur in that utility territory. In Seattle I actually do

this for my place in Seattle. You can pay $3 and get 25

percent of your bill offset by green power all the way up

to 100 percent per month for $12. Again, that money is

being used to help build future green renewable energy

projects in those territories.


208

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Now on the other side, Seattle City Light is also

doing something very interesting. They also have a

voluntary program where you can donate any amount of money

that you want. That money goes into a fund which is

similar to a grant, and that fund is used to do community

outreach, community education, community type projects,

So, for example, they've actually done the installation of

photovoltaic on community centers, on parks. They use that

money to help incentivize that type of activity. So this

is already being done by Seattle City Light, as well as a

handful of other utilities around the country today.

Now another thing that can be done is the utility

facilitating the use of renewable energy certificates. Now

renewable energy certificates are also known as RECs.

Sometimes they're called green tags. Essentially, it's a

separate commodity. When you buy -- when you're an energy

project developer, you create your power from your -- let's

say we're talking about a wind project. You create your

power from your wind. On top of that you also have your

environmental goodwill, which is your REC. You can use

that REC and sell it to the public markets or to the local

and state markets if there's a commodities-based market

established. And you use that additional money to help

you -- basically help the economics of your projects. That

REC makes your project better. And I've got a slide which


209

r 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

will show how that works.

So what I really wanted to do was really kind of have

this thing hit home, so what I decided to do was I

calculated all of the energy that I used in building this

presentation: the air-conditioning, the time, the gas to

get to the office, the electricity from the laptop

computer. Then I went to a website to purchase a REC. I

put it into the website in a very, very easy form, put the

kilowatt hours that I was using in, and basically was able

to purchase on line this certificate. So the presentation

that I'm delivering to you today is actually powered by

green power. I paid something like $57. I got the offset,

the renewable energy certificate, which went to a project

developer, to help me offset the cost of energy and the

emissions ultimately that I used to build this

presentation.

Now, of course, there are other things that you can

do. You can offset your car travel. You can offset your

air travel. I've actually been in airports where there are

kiosks similar to ATMs where you can actually go there,

input the designation to where you're going, pay a fee, and

you will then be using or purchasing an offset to help

incentivize, again, that problem to deliver the -- whether

it be reforestation or sequestration or green power

generation that is helping to basically offset your travel.


210

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Another thought that I had was, you know, I did this

for my presentation. Could these kind of things be done

for things like this, conferences like this? Yes. I was

at Sun Power 2006, and the entire conference was offset via

REC by a trader, and that was done in San Jose. So these

are the kinds of things that are being done by utilities

right now to help incentivize projects, green power

projects.

Now here's a slide I talked about earlier. How does

buying a green tag help a renewable energy project

developer? Well, essentially here's what it is. In this

case I picked a utility that was similar in size to

Hawaiian Electric. This utility is Atlantic City Electric.

They're also investor owned, about the same size as

Hawaiian Electric. They currently have a program where you

can purchase power from four different independent power

producers at a preset amount; in the case of the first

yellow box, 1.3 cents per kilowatt hour, which roughly

equates to about $9.10 a month for the offset from that

utility.

Now what does that mean for the energy project? Well,

essentially, if you were doing a 10 megawatt solar project,

at 13 cents per kilowatt hour, your revenues is about

2.3 million dollars. Not bad. Could be better, obviously,

if the -- excuse me -- the cost per kilowatt hour went up


211

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

At 13 cents per kilowatt hour, it doesn't make a lot of

sense for a lot of green power producers to build their

projects. Generally speaking, you want to be at about

15 cents per kilowatt hour to make your projects make

sense.

Now when you add that green tag, that 1.3 cents per

kilowatt hour on top of the 13 cents per kilowatt hour, it

becomes a lot more economical. So at the end of the day,

what that means for the energy project developer is an

additional $236,000 a year. Now that's 10 percent for that

energy project developer. From a project developer's

standpoint, on a pro forma basis, that's huge. Most

utilities, most businesses struggle to get a one percent

profit out of their business. Here, by one cent, we' re

helping them get 10 percent. This makes a pro forma work.

This helps project developers build projects.

Now a lot has been done outside of the United States

to help incentivize green power or clean energy. One of

the biggest things, if you ask any project developer out

there, is the feed-in tariff. What exactly is a feed-in

tariff? Well, essentially, it allows renewable energy

projects to tie directly into the grid and sell their power

for a very, very high rate. At the end of the day, the

rate could be very high, as high as 60 cents per kilowatt

hour. So, for example, in Germany where they have a very


212

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

famous feed-in tariff, people are installing photovoltaic

systems on their rooftops, selling back the power to the

utilities, and actually becoming net minus fuel emitters of

carbon. They're actually being -- they're actually selling

back all the environmental goodwill into the grid.

Here's an example of how the feed-in tariff works or

what it did, essentially. The yellow box there shows you

the landscape in Europe before feed-in tariff. When

feed-in tariff went into effect, it basically paid more for

green energy. As you can see, the bars go up. A lot more

people are doing it, and not just on the large scale, not

just on the utility scale, but also on the home scale. So

it essentially helped to kick-start the marketplace there.

And as a result of the European feed-in tariff, other

countries have also jumped in, Ontario being the last, but

also Portugal and Spain having very, very popular feed-in

tariff mechanisms now.

Now to make a feed-in tariff work, the utility has to

want to want it to work. At the end of the day, it doesn't

work if the utility is not going to work with the

government to make the feed-in tariff work. But this is

one of those kinds of things that utilities can be doing

today to help incentivize green power.

One of the other, I think, important things that heeds

to be done is good education to the consumer level, and not


213

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

just the consumer, but the industry professionals as well.

We've got great programs like the Jade Moon commercials and

radio ads and you see print ads as well that you see now.

These are great, but they don't necessarily educate. They

do a great job of showing a bunch people in the audience

with compact fluorescents. But we need to educate. We

need to take it one step further. And I think the utility

has an opportunity to take a leadership role here in really

explaining what can be done from the installation of that

compact fluorescent lamp; workshops, for example, seminars,

public outreach events, taking it to the public to really

help them understand what can be done when you change that

compact fluorescent or when you install that photovoltaic

system up there.

Now the other big thing is we need to clear up the

misconceptions. There's a lot of propaganda circulating

out there, and at the end of the day, propaganda kills

projects. We need to make sure that everybody understands

the real economics, the real factors behind these energy

projects, these green energy projects, to allow them to

work. And ultimately, we need to get the public involved.

So what kinds of things can the utility be doing, helping

the consumers understand what we need, where we stand

today, and what their effect can be from doing some green.

Now from an energy project developer's perspective.


214

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

ell

an

an

one of the most important things is your power purchase

agreement. That is your contract with the utility to s

your power directly into the utility grid. This is an

onerous process as it currently stands. Right now it's

11-page non-utility generator followed by a 93-page

Power Point on basically everything under the sun from

independent power producer's standpoint, and then you wait

two years. It's a long process that challenges the energy

project developer simply because a lot of times what we

need to make projects work is the investment tax credit,

the federal tax credits that help to offset the cost.

Those tax credits are generally a year to two years out.

When the NUG or the PPA takes two years to execute and

investment tax credit is up in a year, you really struggle

to try and get your project financing together.

One of the things that we can do here to streamline

this is to basically make it standardized. You know, help

us understand exactly the steps and the time lines between

that. I'm not necessarily saying make it shorter in time,

but help us understand the true economics behind what it

takes to get a PPA. So I'm suggesting the standardization

or even a guide to a PPA, if you will, that gets out there

to the energy project developer.

What else can utilities be doing? Well, a follow-up

to the PPA is what's known as the standard -- the

the


215

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

interconnection agreement; that is, tying your system into

the utility grid. Generally speaking, when you do this,

every time you do this, you have to reinvent the wheel, and

that's a challenge. It's a cost factor, and it's a

variable cost. You don't necessarily know where you stand,

and you don't necessarily know a lot of factors as to how

long it will take from the utility side to get back to you

with regard to their work, and that's a challenge.

One of the things, again, we can do here is to

standardized this process and come up with possibly some

very simple metrics behind it. If you're installing a 50kw

PV system, here is your standard interconnection agreement,

and here's what you need to do. Here's exactly how much

you're going -- it is going to cost you. And I'm not even

suggesting it get that pinpointed. We could actually have

more of a generalized standards. But I think a set of -- a

standard system would be a really good next step in this,

standardizing interconnection agreements.

Another thing that utilities out there are doing a lot

of is they're investing in projects. They're actually

putting their money where their mouth is. They're not

just buying the green power. They're actually helping to

build the green power project. A good example, as you see

there, is a solar project that's been around for over 20

years in the California desert and generates 354 megawatts


216

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

of power. That project is owned by Florida Power & Light.

That utility is a very dirty utility. They burn a lot of

coal and other things to generate their power. So now

they're creating a renewable energy practice to help offset

their dirty practices.

Another project that you see next to that is a wind

farm, again owned by Florida Power & Light, and that power

is sold to Austin Energy. And it's a relatively large

system, 280 megawatts of power.

It's happening internationally as well. In Spain,

four mega projects similar to that solar collector field

you see there are going up for a gigawatt of power. That' s

a lot of power. And those projects are also owned by

Spanish utilities. So these are things that are being

now.

done

Now Hawaiian Electric has a Renewable Hawai'i which

helps to do that, but I've also circled from the website

the last date that any kind of information has come out of

them. It was back in March of 2005. So these are the

kinds of things that could be done or continue to be done.

Or if it not, let us know where you stand with things pf

this nature.

Also in investment and research, we need -- we

understand that Hawai'i has a very unique grid. We have a

different kind of a peak period than most utilities have


217

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

across the country. We understand we have seasonality. We

understand we're heavily based on tourism. So we need to

know, the community needs to know what kinds of renewable

energy systems work the best within the -- within the

overall grid that we face here in Hawai'i.

So to kind of wrap it up, what I did very, very

quickly was I went through a series of different utilities,

and I wanted to find out what they were doing in green

power. So I went to these utilities' sites, websites, and

I typed in buying -- buy green power. I went after the

investor-owned utilities because I wanted to see what the

effect was of the utilities that were adopting green

practices as it relates to their bottom line. And I went

after the larger utilities. Dark green was they -- I found

some very relevant information by doing this search. Kind

of light green is somewhat relevant information by doing

this search. And gray was not relevant by doing this

search.

Pacific Gas & Electric, five -- and I took the top

five search items that I found, five great things on

renewable energy, five great things on doing education for

the public, helping to green up the city. Oh, and by the

way, five great green things also means revenue went up and

profits went up.

Florida Power & Light, three green things, two


218

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

somewhat green things, one not-so-green thing, somewhat

self-promoting. But also revenues went up; profits went

up.

Southern California Edison, five green things;

revenues went up; profits went up.

Duke Energy, one of the dirtiest utilities in the

country, five green things. Revenues went down, but

profits went up by 2 percent. And when you're as large as

Duke Energy, 2 percent of revenues going up are -- is

multimillions of dollars. That's a lot of money.

And^ of course, Hawaiian Electric, one green thing,

one somewhat green thing, three not-so-green things.

Revenues went down; profits went down. So I think there's

a direct correlation between doing what's good and also

what's green. And also, by the way, profits is green. So

I think that there's some kind of a correlation to be found

there.

So in summary, what can utilities be doing? Well

obviously, the first thing you should be doing is support

energy efficiency, the low-hanging fruit. But then

ultimately, support renewable energy by green programs,

Support complementary renewable technologies. Educate

public as well as professionals. And ultimately, be

transparent. Tell us what you really want. Don't say

thing -^ and I'm not suggesting this is happening, but

the

one


219

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

utilities have a tendency to do this. Just tell us what

you want, and we can go out there and make it happen. You

can empower us to make something happen, something good

happen.

So I guess with that being said, I'll -- I'll wrap it

up and turn it back to Terry.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks very much.

Okay. And again, my thanks to the court reporter.

We'11 give her a minute, and then we'11 start taking some

questions.

(Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.)

THE MODERATOR: By the way, before people start

sneaking out, I'd like to give you all a round of applause

for the majority of you staying here today, so thanks very

much. And thanks again to HECO, to Mina Morita for hosting

this event. I think it's incredibly useful.

INCORPORATING CLIMATE CHANGE INTO THE IRP PROCESS

Question and Answer S e s s i o n

THE MODERATOR; Okay. The first question, to John

Tantlinger: What is DBEDT recommending to the governor

concerning HP 226? Sign? Veto? Let pass without her

signature? That's the first of three, John, by the way.

DR. TANTLINGER: First of three?


220

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

THE MODERATOR: Questions.

DR. TANTLINGER: Repeat the question?

THE MODERATOR: Oh, you want me to repeat the

question?

DR. TANTLINGER: No, no, no, no, no. I'm saying,

the three questions the same, whether DBEDT recommended

are

the

governor --

THE MODERATOR: I think — no, no, no. You won't get

off that easily.

DR. TANTLINGER: That's really a tough question, and

I'll tell you why. Let me put it this way: I'm really not

in a position to be able to answer that question, and

I'm -^ I have to be very honest. I mean, the comments and

recommendation -- this is my understanding, and if I'm

wrong, I will provide the information back to the folks who

were here through HECO. But my understanding -- and maybe

even someone in the audience who may know better than I, an

attorney, for example, with the State. But my

understanding is that the comment and recommendation sheets

that are provided between the agencies and governor are

considered working decision papers until such time as the

decision is rendered. Now if I'm wrong -- and I'm getting

a nod. So, unfortunately, I'm not in a position to answer

that question. I'm staff. I'm not a policymaker. That is

a policy question. And that's really not what I'm -- I'm


221

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

here to respond to.

THE MODERATOR: So -- so in other words, the brief

answer would have been, to quote Mongo from Blazing

Saddles, that you were simply a pawn in the game of life.

DR. TANTLINGER: No, no, that's not what I'm saying.

THE MODERATOR: That — okay. John, John --

DR. TANTLINGER: And I resent that type of

characterization —

THE MODERATOR: No, hey, John --

DR. TANTLINGER: -- even though it's a feeble attempt

at humor.

THE MODERATOR: Yeah, okay.

DR. TANTLINGER: And let me -- and I -- which I do

respect because I love humor. And I got a laugh. Ha, ha.

Okay.

Anyway, let me -- let me try and do it this way. I

will say this; Throughout the legislative session DBEDT

was very actively involved in providing testimony,

participating in working groups regarding the various

greenhouse gas bills. For those of you who have -- who

have endured the entire day, I think you can see that DBEDT

is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and doing

it in a way that is cost effective, that's equitable to the

people of Hawai'i, that doesn't penalize us unfairly, that

does it from a scientifically and very solid analytic base.


222

1 These are the kinds of suggestions that were made during

2 the legislative session throughout it.

3 We believe, as I mentioned this morning, the

4 estimates, for example, on our emissions -- these are the

5 models that were developed to do that. The EPA itself, who

6 developed those models, concedes they were never developed

7 for regulatory purposes. Therefore, we suggested a lot

8 more analysis needs to go into it. The current bill has in

9 it a provision for a significant amount of analysis. We

10 think that's very responsive to the testimony and comments

11 that we've provided. We said that any effort like this

12 needs to be adequately resourced. We actually suggested

13 1.1 million dollars over two years. I believe it's 500,000

14 per year, so a million over two years, for the first two

15 years. And so that, I think, is responsive to the

16 comments.

17 We believe that it's responsive inasmuch as it allows

18 for some flexibility and does not immediately set a target

19 and -- or rather, it does not immediately tie regulations

20 to a definitive target before the analysis is done. And a

21 very complicated and, I think, rigorous analysis is well

22 outlined in that statute. So from that perspective I think

23 you can tell that we believe that the current version of

24 the bill responded in many ways to the testimony that DBEDT

25 provided. But in addition, it did not respond to some of


223

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the other comments that we provided. So I think that sort

of characterizes --

THE MODERATOR: Is there any decisions --

DR. TANTLINGER: -- our thoughts.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Second part is, are there any

decisions that have been made about who would be in charge

of this, should it become law, within -- within DBEDT?

DR. TANTLINGER: Oh, that's easy. Oh, within DBEDT.

Oh, I thought you meant who was gonna be in charge of

it, 'cause that's in the law.

No. Well, yeah, wait a minute. What am I saying?

It's in the law: the DBEDT director --

THE MODERATOR: Okay.

DR. TANTLINGER: -- of course, or his designee.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Carl, will the IRP wait to

specify mission reductions until the state mandate takes

effect?

MR. FREEDMAN: Oh, I'd be guessing. I think what I

was trying to say is that there's no mandate at this time.

I was trying to also stress that the Commission has a great

deal of discretion, and I'm not gonna guess where the

Commission's gonna go or where the utility is gonna go.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Carl, another one: Should --

did the IRP identify the operational economic trade-offs

between greenhouse gases and other electrotechnologles such


224

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

as ice storage which may not reduce greenhouse gases?

MR. FREEDMAN: I missed the first word. Should or'

THE MODERATOR; Should, yes. Should the IRP identify

the operational economic trade-offs between greenhouse

gases and electrotechnologles which may not reduce

greenhouse gases?

MR. FREEDMAN: Okay. Well, I mean, "should," I'll go

back to the IRP framework here. The intention and the

requirement is that all resources that are feasible within

the time frame of the analysis should be examined. And the

extent to which you look at all those has to do with which

objectives you identify. So if you're gonna identify

the -- as one of your objectives, you know, greenhouse

emissions, then you should be looking at all the different

resource options. And this is up in the information, you

know, characterization phase. You want to figure out for

all potential resource options, how they're going to meet

or address all of the objectives that are identified.

Now how specific do you get? You know, whether or not

that type of analysis in IRP is gonna be -- provide

valuable information to the task force is gonna be

determined by, you know, the depth of the analysis we're

looking at. And hopefully there's gonna be some iteration,

I think, so that the task force and the utilities' efforts

in whatever venue, you know, are helping each other and


225

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

looking at each other.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. And this is for anyone. Any

thoughts on utilities backing green energy with coal to

produce stability?

DR. TANTLINGER: What?

THE MODERATOR; Well, I think the implication is if

you're -- actually, I'm reading into the -- here's the

question again, and I could offer some implication. Any

thoughts on utilities backing green energy with coal to

provide stability? Coal, C-O-A-L.

MR. KIMURA: I don't understand the question.

DR. TANTLINGER: Yes.

MR. FREEDMAN: I think the panel doesn't know how to

answer that question.

THE MODERATOR: You're talking coal and, you know -- I

think coal is -- the implication was that if you have green

power possibly being intermittent, what do you -- what

might you use for baseline?

DR. SURLES: Oh, I see.

THE MODERATOR: I'm -- I'm inferring, if somebody

wants to

MR.

you need

try that.

FREEDMAN:

to look at

I mean, in

the

energy is intermittent.

load in terms of biomass

system

When

, use

any utility

operations.

photovoltaic

planning

and some

-- s ome

process

green

is base

of fuels. So some types of


226

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

intermittent resources need to be backed up. And if you're

gonna use coal to do that, then you're going to be perhaps

diversifying your portfolio by getting away from oil, but

you're also going to be increasing your carbon-per-kilowatt

hour in that quotient.

MR. KIMURA: Well, I'd like to take a stab at that as

well.

You know, I think when we -- when you talk about -- in

the description you made, coal would not be a good way to

base-load or work against green energy. There are other

technologies that you could integrate which have a lower

carbon footprint than coal. Coal is one of the dirtiest

fuels we have that we can burn to create power. So I

wouldn't nec ~- 1 would say to the question that -- kind of

how you rephrased it, Terry, is that, no, that's not a good

suggestion. There are other options out there. Also there

are other kinds of renewable energy technologies.

And I kind of mentioned it in my presentation that

when you take the right technologies and you puzzle them

together, you actually can make this thing work. If you

have a whole bunch of wind, that necessarily isn't the best

way to go. But you match wind up again -- and depends upon

the wind profile -- against certain types of other solar

technologies, possibly with geothermal, and possibly

with -- I'm getting the nod, the indication to slow down


227

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

again -- with hydro, maybe now you have a workable system,

so no -- no to coal.

THE'MODERATOR: Okay. So Darren, since — a question

is to you. What prompted or prompts utilities to make real

changes and go green? This is from your observations.

What would you suggest Hawai'i can do to move our utilities

to be more green?

MR. KIMURA: Well, at the end of the day, a lot of --

a lot of what happens here is -- is driven by economics.

There's been a lot of talk at the federal level for a

cap-and-trade system. A cap-and-trade system would

essentially put a limit on the amount of emissions that

entities like utilities can emit. And once they reach that

level, they have to figure out a way to offset that. So it

essentially enables market factors to play a role.

For example, in Europe now, if you're a dirty

business, you could buy carbon offsets to basically offset

your own dirty footprint. They're trading at about 330 a

metric ton now. Now that ton will go back to somebody

who's creating green power and -- and help incentivize

their business.

So I guess what I'm saying is it has to be economic.

This is -- a lot of the utilities in the United States are

investor owned, so they have a board of directors and

shareholders which they have to report to, dividends which


228

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

they have to give out. So we have to figure out a way to

economically incent them, whether it be on the state level,

on the federal level, or any other possibility, if that's

an adequate answer.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Another one for Darren; Are --

are RECs, FITs, power purchase agreements, PPAs,

et cetera -- and I put in quotes here -- Enronomlcs with

green food coloring?

MR. KIMURA: Well, Enronomlcs, I'm not sure exactl|y

what that is supposed to infer. But let me take a stab at

it anyway. And that's actually a pretty deep question with

power purchase agreements. And the reason -- the reason

it's deep is some utilities unbundle them, meaning that you

can sell power, and you have the ability to sell your green

energy goodwill on the side. Some utilities put them

together, and you cannot separate them, which -- which is a

problem because you don't get the additional dollars of

cents per kilowatt hour for that green aspect. In some

states they are -- they do participate with things like the

Chicago Climate Exchange which, in effect, removes some

ability to do green tagging with in-lieu-of carbon trading.

So, in other words, you can do one or the other. However,

some other markets are now allowing both to occur.

So -- so with that very complicated, probably not very

specific answer, I don't know. I think the market in


229

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

itself is still being developed. The United States, as we

are not part of Kyoto, we're very much independent. Each

state has their own policy, and that in itself lends to

some trouble with being able to sell green tags and having

a fair market value for that or carbon certificates or

whatever the case may be. Enronomlcs, I don't know.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. The next one's for John. And

I'm having problems with the -- with the verb here. I

can't seem to read it. But your presentation, I guess,

mentioned ECAC as rate-sharing. However, it seems that

ECAC shifts all the risk-taking into ratepayers. Isn't

this counterproductive? It seems that because of ECAC, the

utilities lack motivation to lower fuel costs.

DR. TANTLINGER: Yes. Yes. We agree. And that was

the reason that the bill actually -- it began looking at

requiring, actually requiring that you -- costs be shared

by the utilities for fuel. And it was -- eventually

evolved into a situation where it now requires the PUC to

examine that, to study that, as I understand it. And now

forgive me if I don't remember it exactly, but the point

is, they are to develop a way in which the pass-through is

not a complete pass-through, but, rather, develop other

methods so that the risk is not borne strictly by the

consumer for cost -- or fuel cost variability and

increases.


230

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks.

Carl, you speak of the PUC and the IRP process as the

vehicle to realize House Bill 266 [sic]. Why do you see

this as a PUC responsibility rather than one that is

primarily or solely for Department of Health?

MR. FREEDMAN; Well, simply that I think that to the

extent that any law or requirement affects the utilities,

it's gonna come across the PUC's desk and will be reviewed

by the Consumer Advocate. So if you're gonna require the

utility -- let's say there's even a county law. You know,

you could have a county law that would require different

resources or something that might affect resource

development. Anything that's mandatory, that the utility

must do, is gonna affect the Integrated Resource Plans. So

clearly, if the utilities are required by House Bill 226 to

reduce greenhouse emissions, then this needs to be taken

into account in the Integrated Resource Planning process,

and it's gonna have some PUC review.

Now there's — there is also the upstream potential

there that the PUC, you know, could on its own say, hey, we

have HB 226 coming down the pike. As an interim measure

let's have the utilities roll their own emissions -- you

know, come up with some plans that roll their own emissions

back to 1990's to -- either as an investigation of what

it's gonna cost or put together some plans in anticipation


231

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

of what might be coming down. But basically the PUC

oversees all aspects of utility planning. So anything

that's gonna affect their plans is gonna come across the

PUC desk.

THE MODERATOR: Okay. Thanks. And if -- that was the

last question, so if we could have -- oh, Carl.

MR. FREEDMAN: I was just gonna offer a comment that

Darren might say, you know, at the end of the day, you

really have to say it's the end of the day.

THE MODERATOR: Thanks very much guys.

And now before I turn it over to Gary Hashiro, I --

first of all, once again, I'd like to thank the audience

and that there are forms to provide comments to Hawaiian

Electric on today's meeting, and they're available out at

the registration table. So with that, Robbie was unable to

come back, so here's Gary Hashiro.

CLOSING REMARKS

MR. HASHIRO: Hi there. There was a lot of tremendous

information provided today by all the speakers. And more

importantly, the information is specific to Hawai'i and our

unique situation here. For that, I'd like to thank all of

the speakers today. Would you join me in thanking them?

You know, it would be a terrible shame if at the end


232

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

of today when we all go home that this information, this

wonderful information, sort of fell by the wayside. And to

help us not have that happen, today we have our wonderful

court reporter who managed to hang in there throughout the

entire day. Let's give her a round of applause.

And I see quite a few of our advisory group member's

for the Integrated Resource Planning process. This is the

group of folks that advise the utility on how to do our

long-range planning. I'd like to thank you for hanging in

there throughout today.

And last, but not least, I'd like to thank you, the

audience, who with your questions have greatly increased

the information exchange today. So on behalf of

Hawaiian Electric, thank you very much.

I'd like to close by just sort of. What next? What

next here is we're gonna take this information that we

received today, and we're gonna work with our advisory

group members in updating our long-range resource plan over

the next coming months, and that will ultimately be filed

with the Public Utilities Commission for their approve'..

You may see all of the presentation material that's

provided to us. We'll put it up on our website, along with

the transcripts for today. And the website is on the

handout on the last page, as well as an e-mail address if

you have any further comments you'd like to submit to us


233

regarding today's meeting.

With that, aloha, and thank you all for coming today.

(Whereupon, at 4:12 p.m., the hearing was concluded.)

--0O0--

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


234

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

STATE OF HAWAI'I ) )

CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU ) SS

I, Valerie Mariano Swiderski, C.S.R,, a Notary Public

in and for the State of Hawai'i, do hereby certify:

That on Friday, June 8, 2007, at 8:34 a.m., the

foregoing proceedings were had before me; that the

proceedings were taken in computerized machine shorthan

me and were thereafter reduced to print under my

supervision; that the foregoing represents, to the best of

my ability, a correct transcript of the proceedings had in

the foregoing matter.

d by

Dated: QIMA^MS^

irie Mariano Swiderski, C.S.R. #353 Certified Shorthand Reporter State of Hawai'i


Attachment 7

'Oleic broadcast schedule of the technical session

^Olelo's Programming Schedule of the Climate Change / Global Warming Sessions:

Background on Climate Change Issues (Part 1 Date Time

July 3' 8:00 PM July ll*" 9:30 AM July 19^^ 2:30 PM July 24 *" 7:00 PM

Channel 49 - FOCUS 52 - OAHU 52 - OAHU 49 - FOCUS

Policy Implications for Hawaii (Part 2) Date Time

July 10^^ 6:00 PM July 18" ^ 9:00 AM July 26* ^ 9:00 AM Aug. 7 ^ 6:00 PM

Channel 49 - FOCUS 52 - OAHU 52 - OAHU 49 - FOCUS

Date July 10^^ July 18" ^ July 31^' Aug. 7^

Time 8 11 6 8

00 00 00 00

PM AM PM PM

Options and Strategies for Controlling Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Part 3)

Channel 49 - FOCUS 52 - OAHU 49 - FOCUS 49 - FOCUS

Incorporating Climate Change into the IRP Process (Part 4) Date Time Channel

July 18^^ 1:00 PM 52 - OAHU July 26'^ 1:00 PM 52 - OAHU July 31^' 8:00 PM 49 - FOCUS Aug. 14*" 6:00 PM . 49 - FOCUS

Attachment 8

DVD copy of the technical session

Vj^Qsu—Qi^^ 1 - IBM HTTP Server 8.5 - Hawaii.gov

Documents

Transcript of Vj^Qsu—Qi^^ 1 - IBM HTTP Server 8.5 - Hawaii.gov