Lanai's la ola solar farm is dedicated - Business

Full story: Honolulu Star-Bulletin

Isle developer Castle & Cooke Inc. formally completed construction of the largest single-site solar farm in the state yesterday, although it has been operational since mid-December. Some facts, from Castle & ...

Comments (Page 2)

Showing posts 21 - 29 of29
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
an observer

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jan 7, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

Mento wrote:
Sounds great. Let's see ...
5000 barrels of oil saved each year.
A barrel of oil costs around $50 right now.
That's a savings of 5000 x $50 =$250,000.
The solar panels only cost $19 million.
I wonder how much they are planning to charge for each kilowatt sold?
Looking at the wrong numbers. The question is what does $50/bbl oil translate to in current $/kWh for Lanai customers? At the article states, it's currently over $0.50/kWh, so that's the threshhold that needs to be overcome, which definitely has to be the case otherwise this project would never have been undertaken. With the tax credits involved it's definitely a win-win for both the developer and customers.
Farmer

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jan 7, 2009
 
Kuokoa wrote:
MY concern is that 10 ACRES of prime agricultural land is being used to produce only 30% of the electricity needed at peak demand! Could that land maybe be used go grow FOOD? A power plant that uses oil that otherwise would be not used anywhere else only takes a fraction of the space being used by this solar "farm". Additionally, people, we are not in a period of global warming, we are at the beginning of a new ICE AGE in which much of the Earth will freeze.
That was far from being prime Agriculture land and it would have layed vacant. It was rated very, very low as Ag land.
Gee we can use Ag land for Bio fuels and seed corn but not to generate clean energy. Seems a little dumb.
Ag on the scale of Sugar Cane and Pineapple is dead in Hawaii. That's why all these big land holders have become developers.
realmerv

Wahiawa, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jan 7, 2009
 
mauisurfer wrote:
wrong technology
Solar THERMAL is much more efficient than photovoltaic for an application this size. Solar thermal stores HEAT, so power can be produced when there is little sun. Solar thermal does NOT use silicon, it is completely proven known technology. There are more than 20 solar thermal powerplants in California that have been operating 24/7 for over 20 years. The newest one now being built is at Gila Bend, Arizona. The Arizona Public Utilities Commission is years ahead of Lingle, Tavares, and HECO/MECO.
Google this:
Abengoa solar, Gila Bend, Arizona.
Lingle, Tavares, and HECO/MECO had nothing to do with the solar farm. It is the developer, Castle & Cooke who developed the solar project after obtaining all the permits to proceed and complete the project.

Politicians may talk about energy projects but it takes private developers to complete the projects. The developer is the one who decides what technology to use for his project since he is the one risking his capital.
realmerv

Wahiawa, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jan 7, 2009
 
We have a lot of unproductive lava land zoned ag or conservation on the Big Island on the Kona side of the island that would be ideal for solar farms. Solar farms could be built in the areas between Kailua-Kona and Waikoloa and hidden away in the low lying areas and out of sight from the Queen Kaahumanu Hwy.
Forward Observer

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Jan 7, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

1

an observer wrote:
<quoted text>
Looking at the wrong numbers. The question is what does $50/bbl oil translate to in current $/kWh for Lanai customers? At the article states, it's currently over $0.50/kWh, so that's the threshhold that needs to be overcome, which definitely has to be the case otherwise this project would never have been undertaken. With the tax credits involved it's definitely a win-win for both the developer and customers.
Tax credits equal taxpayer subsidy. So the price of electricity generated from this project is affordable for Lanai residents only because other taxpayers are paying part of the bill?
Forward Observer

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jan 7, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

... Politicians may talk about energy projects but it takes private developers to complete the projects. The developer is the one who decides what technology to use for his project since he is the one risking his capital.
Nice talk but according to other comments this project would not be feasible but for taxpayer subsidies in the form of tax credits. Although reducing our reliance on imported fossil fuels should our goal we should not deceive ourselves into believing that replacement technologies will be cheaper than fossil fuels.
alice

Maunaloa, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Jan 7, 2009
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Lanai deserves congrats for this wise policy
Forward Observer

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Jan 7, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

<quoted text>
Looking at the wrong numbers. The question is what does $50/bbl oil translate to in current $/kWh for Lanai customers? At the article states, it's currently over $0.50/kWh, so that's the threshhold that needs to be overcome, which definitely has to be the case otherwise this project would never have been undertaken. With the tax credits involved it's definitely a win-win for both the developer and customers.
I seem to recall that the price per kWh in Honolulu is $.35. It makes sense then that the solar plant was built on Lanai because of the high of electricity there. But everyone needs to keep in mind that the true cost per kWh from solar is higher than even $.50 (which is the cost from fossil fuels there). The only reason they might be paying less is because YOU, the taxpayers, are subsidizing Lanai's energy costs through tax credits. That includes the electricity used by those pricey hotels there, too. Still feeling good about this?

Since: Jul 08

Lana'i

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Nov 10, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Forward Observer wrote:
<quoted text> I seem to recall that the price per kWh in Honolulu is $.35. It makes sense then that the solar plant was built on Lanai because of the high of electricity there. But everyone needs to keep in mind that the true cost per kWh from solar is higher than even $.50 (which is the cost from fossil fuels there). The only reason they might be paying less is because YOU, the taxpayers, are subsidizing Lanai's energy costs through tax credits. That includes the electricity used by those pricey hotels there, too. Still feeling good about this?
Even with the Solar Farms, Lana'i still has the highest rates.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 21 - 29 of29
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Lanai City Discussions

Search the Lanai City Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Thank you Mar '14 Judy and Art 1
Lahaina Music Thread (Aug '13) Mar '14 Musikologist 5
Ululani's keeps growIng Feb '14 Betty 1
Driving New Business Feb '14 JF 2
Lanai City Music Thread (Aug '13) Jan '14 Musikologist 4
Maui siblings charged in police beating - News (Apr '09) Dec '13 Turk 169
Marriage Equality and Representative Carroll Nov '13 graysonga 1
•••
•••
•••
•••

Lanai City Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Lanai City People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••