Good radio interview on Hawaii Public Radio this evening with Senator Hooser, Mike Formby, and Irene Bowie (it will be up on podcast in a few days). The host Beth-Ann Kozlovich mentioned Tim Dick's recent blog entry on HSF. I had not seen it. Later in the show Tim Dick called in to try to state his case particularly for the size of the vessel. Actually the size of the vessel is not the most important point. The key point for commercial viability is not size but instead the amount of engine power, four 9000 kW utility scale marine diesel engines...almost twice the effective engine power, fuel consumption, and carbon emissions of any other comparable means of regularly scheduled interisland travel here.
Based on a complete survey of all ferries operating in the United States, I believe the ideal Hawaii interisland ferry would utilize half of the engine power of the Alakai and Huakai, not transport vehicles for personal use, only cargo vehicles, be able to make the interisland transits in 4 to 5 hours, and be able to transport 400 to 500 people and less than 50 cargo vehicles only. The new Chapter 343 EIS should allow for such realistic viability instead of continuing to be for one type of vessel or company.
Have reposted a comment to this in reply to Tim Dick's recent post on his Use Half blog.
Aloha, Brad
Showing posts with label Use much less than half. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Use much less than half. Show all posts
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Act 2 Loose Ends...EIS needs to be redone
I see the spinmeisters are trying to put the word out that the EIS could be completed in "2 to 3 months." Actually, that is an Act 2 pseudo-EIS (which no longer has any legal foundation) with limited focus and no more public involvement from here on out. On a Chapter 343 EIS the public has continued involvement even on the final draft and that can be challenged. Also, a real Chapter 343 EIS on this should not be prepared by the DOT. That is a conflict of interest.
Also, Lingle says when they started drafting Act 2 they were doing the legally correct thing. Wrong. Lingle says there are a lot of small businesses dependent upon HSF, then she should list them. There are only a handful of businesses, most are not small, and they have options and are not totally dependent upon HSF. Lingle also says HSF is lower cost than it's competitors. Wrong. The airlines are now lower cost than HSF and Young Brothers is lower cost than HSF at moving cargo. So that is wrong, wrong, and wrong on Lingle's points. One of the other people in an e-mail group on this says Lingle is in a "state of denial."
One last thing. I was misquoted in the following:
Brad Parsons, a Superferry critic who splits his time between Maui and Kaua'i, said the ruling gives him "a sense of great relief and inspiration, that the Supreme Court justices did the right thing, with good reason and well-thought-out logic. ... It's like a big weight off my shoulders that there is somebody at the state that did the right thing, finally."
The quote is correct until that last sentence. I never said that last sentence. I would not view it as a weight on my shoulders only, and in addition to the State Supreme Court Justices there were a few people in the Legislature who did try to do the right thing.
Aloha, Brad
P.S. In reply to Tim Dick's comments on his Use Half blog, questioning my carbon use, I last visited Maui for a couple of days in Sept. 2008, to attend the OTF committee hearing, prior to that I was last on Maui in May 2008. I haven't been back to Maui since. Personally, I view casual interisland travel as a waste of resources and money. Rather than "using half," I have cut that back to almost nothing, something that much of HSF's expected market appears to have also done in the past 6 months or more.
Also, Lingle says when they started drafting Act 2 they were doing the legally correct thing. Wrong. Lingle says there are a lot of small businesses dependent upon HSF, then she should list them. There are only a handful of businesses, most are not small, and they have options and are not totally dependent upon HSF. Lingle also says HSF is lower cost than it's competitors. Wrong. The airlines are now lower cost than HSF and Young Brothers is lower cost than HSF at moving cargo. So that is wrong, wrong, and wrong on Lingle's points. One of the other people in an e-mail group on this says Lingle is in a "state of denial."
One last thing. I was misquoted in the following:
Brad Parsons, a Superferry critic who splits his time between Maui and Kaua'i, said the ruling gives him "a sense of great relief and inspiration, that the Supreme Court justices did the right thing, with good reason and well-thought-out logic. ... It's like a big weight off my shoulders that there is somebody at the state that did the right thing, finally."
The quote is correct until that last sentence. I never said that last sentence. I would not view it as a weight on my shoulders only, and in addition to the State Supreme Court Justices there were a few people in the Legislature who did try to do the right thing.
Aloha, Brad
P.S. In reply to Tim Dick's comments on his Use Half blog, questioning my carbon use, I last visited Maui for a couple of days in Sept. 2008, to attend the OTF committee hearing, prior to that I was last on Maui in May 2008. I haven't been back to Maui since. Personally, I view casual interisland travel as a waste of resources and money. Rather than "using half," I have cut that back to almost nothing, something that much of HSF's expected market appears to have also done in the past 6 months or more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
