Gov. Josh Green turned heads this summer when he suggested the state should reconsider importing liquefied natural gas, or LNG. Now, the Hawaiʻi State Energy Office is close to releasing a comprehensive analysis on whether or not the controversial energy resource is a good bet for the islands.
Hawaiʻi currently uses a negligible amount of LNG, which is a fossil fuel made by cooling natural gas to low temperatures so that it becomes a liquid, making it easier to store and transport.
Former Gov. David Ige opposed LNG as part of Hawaiʻi’s energy mix, but the current administration thinks it may be time to put it back on the table.
The Energy Office initially expected to release their report on LNG by mid-summer, but Chief Energy Officer Mark Glick said his team has added several components to their analysis. It’s now expected to be completed by early December.
The report will assess whether importing LNG in place of low-sulfur fuel oil could reduce energy costs and carbon emissions while also attracting capital investments in the state’s energy system.
“It would be a very ambitious and challenging thing to do, but if it offers the promise of reducing costs and carbon, it may be worth doing,” Glick said.
However, some see increasing Hawaiʻi’s reliance on LNG as a betrayal of the state’s commitment to reduce fossil fuels.
The Sierra Club of Hawaiʻi and 350Hawaiʻi have pushed back against the idea, pointing to recent research that shows LNG may be worse for the climate than coal.
Henry Curtis, executive director of the Life of the Land, called the proposal “unwise.”
Curtis acknowledged that if the analysis showed that natural gas was truly cheaper than oil, the strategy “theoretically could make some sense.”
But Curtis also pointed out that the state has already made significant investments in renewable energy, which is in many cases cheaper than fossil fuel.
“So the idea that we would take our eye off the cheaper and long-term solution to build a bridge to nowhere involving LNG is crazy, in our opinion,” Curtis said.
Even if the state’s analysis supports LNG, Glick said the timing of it would be tricky. The state has a mandate to be fossil fuel-free by 2045. That means ramping up, and then completely ramping down, LNG use in just two decades.
Glick estimates that means the infrastructure would have to be up and running by 2033, and those projects would likely need approval by next year.
“I think that's the real challenge here, and I think this is why we should take a look at this plan and probably immediately discount it,” said Jeff Mikulina, a climate and social impact strategist.
“The timelines required to fit this into this narrow window before we get to 100% renewable is just really unattainable," he said.
Glick said that LNG is not the only path the state is exploring to reach its renewable endgame and his office plans to release an update on energy transition efforts alongside the LNG report in December.
