Geothermal, Government

Testimonials re: Geothermal Bills 256 & 257

7 Comments

Richard Ha writes:

Yesterday there was a County Council meeting, which was called to address the Mayor’s veto of Bills 256 and 257, both related to geothermal.

Eleven folks testified at the Hilo Council chambers and 10 at the Pahoa facility. In Hilo, all were in favor of supporting the Mayor’s veto, and in Pahoa all but three supported it.

We were all puzzled as to why so few members of the opposition showed up. Later we learned that a day before the meeting, the opposition had been notified there would not be a vote. The vote was postponed until August 1st.

The following testimonials are from residents of Leilani Estates, a subdivision that is within a mile of the Puna Geothermal Venture facility. Among much more, they say that some of the folks making claims do not live in the neighborhood, and that they do not know any neighbors who have gotten sick from the geothermal plant.

Here are three testimonials from Leilani Estates residents:

***

I was pleased to hear that the Mayor had vetoed bills 256 and 257 which had somehow made it through the County Council. Now, according to the newspaper at least, the chairman is intending to bring both of these up with the hope of overriding the veto. My opinion, that I have previously stated both in written testimony and in person, is that Bill 256 is incomplete at best and bill 257 is unnecessary.

Bill 256 has been presented to appease a group of activists, many of whom do not even live in the community close to the PGV, which I do live in. It was written using anecdotal comments, hearsay, and with no real science to support it. Bill 257 was written with no regard to the advice from the very agency tasked with creating it. Just why should the County say that one business needs a site specific plan and not another when the responsible department feels that existing evacuation plans are sufficient?

Please, do not:

End Community Benefits funding

Create a poorly defined Buffer Zone

Buy and Condemn perfectly good homes in a thriving subdivision.

De-value my property.

Use County resources unnecessarily.

Legislate in a vacuum, without either medical or scientific data supporting these actions.

Create redundant and unnecessary plans for an unlikely, worst-case scenario.

As I read the existing law there exists a method for increased monitoring and data accumulation. Why don’t you try to find the answers, find the justification for any changes to the law rather than barging ahead based on emotion or, god forbid, politics. I understand that Council members compromise and trade support for each other and that is fine, that’s how it works. But now is the time to get this issue off of the front page and turn your attention to the real issues.

Jay & Sara Bondesen
Leilani Estates

***

My name is Petra Wiesenbauer and I am asking you to not override the mayor’s veto on bill 256, draft 2.
My family and I have lived in Leilani Estates for the past 14 years and are active participants in the Leilani and Pahoa Community. We are registered voters, vote in each election and are very interested in the development, improvements and growth of this local community and economy. We have two children, 7 and 9, who both go to Christian Liberty Academy in Keaau. We own and operate a successful Bed & Breakfast, located on the corner of Makamae and Kahukai Street.
Our B&B is licensed and legally permitted with a Special Use Permit from the County of Hawaii and we have worked hard to build it up to a viable business with a revenue that we pay GE and TA taxes on. Petra runs the B&B and John works full-time for Willocks Construction Corporation. Before coming to the Leilani Estates, we have lived in many places in Europe, the continental US and 2 years on Oahu. But where we are now, is our home and we are vested in this community. Our business is our main source of income and is part of our retirement plan.
The reason we are asking you to vote against bill 256, draft 2 and not override the Mayoral veto is the creation of the one-mile safety buffer zone, in which the County would offer to buy up properties that then would be left uninhabited. We are extremely concerned about this aspect, as we feel, that a decision like this needs to be based on clear scientific evidence of an apparent health threat for the area.
Since there have been no systematic health studies conducted in the past for this area, setting the safety buffer zone at one mile or any distance is completely arbitrary. In our opinion, legislation has to be based on clear facts and not anecdotal evidence. Many of the people testifying in this process against geothermal energy do not live anywhere near the power plant. How can they prove that there health conditions are brought on by the PGV? We live in the one-mile zone and have no health issues at all that we would be able to trace back to the plant. We have friends that have worked at the plant for many years and there is nothing wrong with their health.
We understand what happened during the blow-out of the well in 1991 and are horrified by the affects to the population around the plant back then. However, 21 years later things have changed: Technology is far advanced and safety measures are very strict. In the 14 years we have lived less than 1 mile away from the plant, we have not had any health consequences, dizziness, respiratory problems or weakness that could be contributed to exposure to toxic gases. We know, what pollution, including sulfur looks and smells like, having lived in places, where this is a daily occurrence.
In fact going over to the Kona side is an example of being exposed to bad air through the vog. Never have we felt around our home and community what we feel in Kona: dizziness, headaches and numbness. Before a decision can be made to condemn this area around the plant we ask you to make sure, that there will be evidence gathered systematically and not anecdotally, independent health studies conducted and further research done. We gladly volunteer to participate.
Condemning this area and establishing the one-mile buffer zone at this point would mean that property values are negatively impacted and insurance (homeowners and liability) will either get more expensive or will no longer be available. Without liability insurance we would have to shut down our business. If this bill passes we may lose all of our investment into our home and business, and we would never be able to sell our business someday in the future. We have invested our lifesavings into our business and home and have worked extremely hard. This bill would kill our small business. This area here will be made a ghost area with vacant homes, squatters and drug houses moving in. The economy around Pahoa will take another detrimental hit.
The State Legislature recently passed several bills with changes to the Hawaii State Planning Act to include the development of geothermal energy resources on State Land and it amended the Hawaii State Planning Act to include promoting the development of geothermal energy resources that are located on State Land as a source of firm power to reduce the cost of electricity. Hawaii has the strictest air monitoring standards for geothermal activities in our country, and in fact in the world. Geothermal Energy is an alternative energy, that is available on this island and it would be insane not to use it. It is a matter of making it as safe as possible and passing the benefits of this less expensive energy on to the customers.

 

Petra Wiesenbauer

***

Aloha Hawaii County Council Members,

My name is Loren Avedon I live in Leilani Estates Puna, and have for the last 3 years.  I am writing this testimony is in support of the mayors veto of Bill 256, Draft 2, the legislation to amend Chapter 2 article 36 of the Hawaii County code, the Geothermal Relocation and Community Benefits Fund.

Bill 256 does not represent the “best use” of these funds for many reasons as stated in the Mayor’s veto.

The truth is that a number of homes have been built within a one mile radius after the plant was operational, with full knowledge of the geothermal plant, and its relocation fund.

There is no evidence of any health related issues from the geothermal plant, nor is there evidence that a 1 mile “buffer zone” is necessary.  I live approximately on the border of the proposed “buffer zone” and I wish to report that since living in Leilani estates my health has actually improved, and I know not one of my neighbors who are affected by the Geothermal Plant.

Where is the scientific evidence of the need for this 1 mile buffer zone?  The answer is there is none.  If there is then GPV is clearly endangering the public welfare. So then what is the basis for this Bill?  Is it to cover up the truth?

Offering 130% of assessed value for the properties would be a fiasco for the county financially, the fund would quickly be depleted just buying homes and property.  Where will the additional money come from?  What agency will manage those properties?  What use will the county make of that land deemed uninhabitable?  How will that affect future property values in the area as well as the county’s ability to allow more test drilling for future geothermal power plant locations?  There are plans to drill in West Hawaii, what will happen to those properties and their usability?

This bill is a terrible idea, for the reasons stated in Mayor Kenoi’s Veto.  This bill will create more debt and deplete the county’s tax revenue base by making it law!?  It just doesn’t make any sense?

I know for a fact that you will ruin my property value, as well as your ability to tax more than 1000 lots in the Leilani subdivision.  I expect that if this bill passes it will go to the Hawaii Supreme court for many reasons.  In addition I am sure that the remainder of our subdivision will file suit for loss of use, and the county’s negligence in allowing a hazardous activity to be conducted so close to any human population.  What evidence of this hazardous activity will for the basis of this suit?  It will be the bill signed into law by the county council of Hawaii without any evidence and consideration of future impact.

The county council is setting itself for allot of problems with this legislation, and showing poor judgment and instilling “no confidence” in its leadership decision to support this bill. If the council makes this law, not only will you ruin me, but you will ruin the trust I have in your leadership and most likely raise red flags for any future industries that wish to do business in Hawaii. That may cause the county’s bond rating to drop, cause more deficit spending, and further cripple our financial future for all of Hawaii county.

I feel that to expand the relocation program to anyone who moved there knowingly, is a huge mistake and a waste of the County’s funds and bad for the future of Hawaii county.

Please uphold the Mayor’s veto against Bill 256, Draft 2, the legislation to amend the Geothermal Relocation and Community Benefits Fund.

Thank you again for the opportunity to submit written testimony and for your careful consideration of this matter.

Loren Avedon
Leilani Estates, Hawaii

Geothermal

Why County Council Shouldn’t Override the County Bill 256 Veto

5 Comments

Richard Ha writes: 

I'd like to share with you a letter to the editor I submitted to the local newspapers. It's about the recent County Bill 256. I wrote about it here. The bill passed, but then was vetoed by Mayor Billy Kenoi. Tomorrow the Council meets and will discuss trying to override the veto.

I wrote this letter because I think it's very important to have a solid base of facts to start off with. We need to give ourselves some time to really think about these issues, in order to make good decisions.

I remember so clearly what Kumu Lehua Veincent told me early on. He said, "What about the rest?" And that's what I think is so important here. Oil prices are rising, and there are plenty of people just barely getting by with high electricity rates and other, related, rising costs. We need to worry about the rest.

Dear Editor,

I feel strongly that the County Council should not override the Mayor’s recent veto of geothermal bills before we understand the issues better.

Even the homeowners’ association in Leilani Estates, a subdivision near Puna Geothermal Venture, supports the Mayor’s veto. We agree we must take a systematic and scientific look at the situation before making far-reaching decisions.

Did you know?

No scientific study done anywhere in the world, ever, has shown that hydrogen sulfide levels such as exist in Puna produce the negative effects anecdotally claimed by some.

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) comes primarily from chemical and bacterial action in the earth. Bacteria even produces hydrogen sulfide in the human gut.

In Hawai‘i, we monitor for two different levels of H2S. 

1) The Hawai‘i State Department of Health (DOH) regulates H2S at "nuisance levels,” which is defined as what one can smell. The human nose can pick up the H2S smell at about 5 parts per billion. 

2) The Office of Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) regulates H2S "safety levels." According to OSHA, it’s safe for workers to spend 40 hours per week around H2S when levels are at or below 10,000 parts per billion. This is far, far below levels considered unsafe (which are measured in parts per million, not billion) 

Some other facts:

• Many millions of people around the world spend their vacation time and money on health spas and onsens that use water heated via geothermal action. During these vacations for health and well being, they are exposed to levels of H2S much higher than Puna residents have experienced in 99.99 percent of their time in Puna.

• Ambient levels of H2S in residential Rotorua, New Zealand, are routinely 100 to 1000 times higher than the level our DOH regulates for.

• In personally observing Iceland and the Philippines’ geothermal operations, I was interested to note that Hawai‘i is much, much stricter about regulating hydrogen sulfide.

• Even the “blowout” at PGV that happened some years ago was within OSHA’s safety levels. OSHA’s permitted H2S exposure – up to 10,000 parts per billion for eight hour days, five days a week – is the equivalent of 2800 ppb continuously over 24 hours, indefinitely, and this is about what was detected at the perimeter of PGV during the "blowout." The long-term, ambient H2S average in Puna, near the geothermal facility, is closer to 2 ppb. 

• The Hawaii State DOH has said that there are no health issues related to emissions of H2S at PGV.

We need to base our decisions and laws on the facts, not unsubstantiated fears.

Richard Ha
Hamakua Springs Country Farms

Peak Oil

Rapier Speaks on Others’ Views re: Global Energy

Richard Ha writes:

In the following video from Consumer Energy Report, Energy Expert Robert Rapier discusses a recently released paper by former Eni Executive Leonardo Maugeri, in which Maugeri suggests that by the end of the decade, global oil supplies will increase by 17 million barrels per day. Rapier also talks about George Monbiot’s reaction to that report. Monbiot is a prominent environmentalist concerned about global warming.

I like Robert Rapier’s views. He is fearless, credible, easy to understand and has common sense.

Though some articles recently have suggested that the U.S. has more petroleum resources than Saudi Arabia, and suggest, “Don’t worry, be happy,” we must play the position on the chess board as it exists – not as we wish it were.

Where are we now and where do we want to go?

In general, oil at $125 a barrel has thrown the world into recession. If it falls below $70 per barrel, some folks will lose money and stop production. We will probably be between those two prices for a short while. Oil is a finite resource, and the forces of depletion are relentless.

Hawai‘i has a lot of catching up to do. We need to move toward geothermal so we can dodge the bullet.

Photo

Look who I got to hang out with the other day. It’s Scotty Blaisdell, left, and Robert Rapier, right. They are classmates from a small Oklahoma town, both of whom have made it big in Hawai‘i. Scotty is the award-winning Star 101.9 radio co-host known as “Scotty-B.”

Current Affairs

Drought = Shriveled Corn Crop = Rising Food Crops

Richard Ha writes:

Our country’s corn crop is at risk due to the recent/current drought in the Midwest. The consequence is going to be rising food costs.

More about it here at Huffington Post:

Corn pushes higher as crops shrivel in heat wave

Sandy Shore | July 12, 2012 04:40 PM EST | 

The price of corn jumped 4 percent Thursday as crops continue to shrivel in a relentless heat wave across much of the country.

December corn futures rose 28.25 cents to end at $7.3225 per bushel. That’s the highest price since August.

About 30 percent of the crop is in poor to very poor condition, compared with just 9 percent in that shape a year ago.

The outlook isn’t encouraging, either. The chance of precipitation is below normal for some Midwestern states over the next several days, according to an Accuweather.com forecast. Analysts have said that the corn crop could sustain additional damage without significant moisture in the near future.

The U.S. Agriculture Department predicted Wednesday that this year’s harvest would be 12 percent smaller than it had forecast in June because of damage to crops from the persistently hot, dry weather. Read the rest here

Bananas, Tomatoes

How Global Warming is Impacting Food Crops

I sent this Wall Street Journal online link to Dr. Bruce Matthews, the Interim Dean of UH Hilo’s College of Ag and Forestry.

Rising carbon-dioxide levels are slightly helping crops compete against weeds.

Two rival designs of plant biochemistry compete to dominate the globe. One, called C3 after the number of carbon atoms in the initial sugars it makes, is old, but still dominant. Rice is a C3 plant. The other, called C4, is newer in evolutionary history, and now has about 21% of the photosynthesis “market.” Corn is a C4 plant. In hot weather, the C3 mechanism becomes inefficient at grabbing carbon dioxide from the air, but in cool weather C4 stops working altogether. So at first glance it seems as if global warming should benefit C4…. Read the rest

He responded:
Thanks for sharing the article. Back in 2002 I spent a day with John Sheehy at IRRI (Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines) when he was just starting his work on trying to make a C4 rice plant.  He is retired now but still serves as a consultant to IRRI on plant physiology and breeding.
“Smart” crop varieties that yield more under higher temperatures and more frequent water stress with fewer inputs are pivotol to the future success of agriculture in the tropics. Result-oriented breeding programs are critically needed.
Bananas are a C4 plant and will do fine under rising temperatures. Tomatoes, a C3 plant, may benefit by breeding them into a C4 heat-tolerant plant.
Big Island, Biofuel

Big Island Biodiesel Grand Opening

3 Comments

Richard Ha writes:

Big Island Biodiesel had its grand opening last week, and I took a tour of its facility.

Biodiesel

I have been a long-time supporter of its business model. It works.

Now, with the help of the UH College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR), as well as the Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center and others, farmers can start to think about what crops might be profitably grown to make biofuels.

From a Civil Beat article:

Richard Ha, owner of Hamakua Springs Country Farms, who has been a vocal critic of biofuels in the past, was optimistic about the plant.

“They have the best business model to make it work,” he said. “And the reason for it is this facility is paid for . . . So when they come and talk to the farmers it doesn’t rest only on the farmers. They already have the business model.”

But he did say that it wasn’t without challenges for the farmer.

He broke it down this way:

Big Island farmers sell hay for $70 — $75 per 500 pound bale. That is $280 to $300 per ton. On the mainland the folks who were planning to make cellulosic biofuels needed it for $45 per ton. But, the farmers were getting $100 per ton for hay. So, they got a $45 per ton subsidy.

Beside the feedstock gap, the farmer will need to pay for something to squeeze the oil out of the sunflower. So, the obstacle to get over is quite high. Read the rest here.

Biofuel, Geothermal

The Farmer’s Point of View (on Geothermal & Biofuels)

3 Comments

Richard Ha writes:

I recently participated in a panel discussion at the Hawaii State Association of Counties conference, which was held at the Hapuna Prince Hotel. I was on the Renewable Energy panel to present the farmer’s point of view.

HSAC

Panel members, left to right: Jay Ignacio, President of HELCO; Joe Pontanilla, Vice Chair of Maui County Council; Mina Morita, Chair of the PUC; me; The Honorable Patricia Talbert, IDG

Here’s what I talked about:

I have attended four Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO) conferences on the mainland. I went to learn about oil so I could position our farm business for the future. The most important thing I learned from my first trip was that the world had been using twice as much oil as it had been finding for the last 20 to 30 years. Clearly this was not good, and would have consequences.

A concept I picked up was Energy Return on Investment (EROI), sometimes called EROEI – Energy Returned on Energy Invested. It answers the question: What is the net energy left over after energy is used to get it? Said another way, the energy left over to get energy minus the energy it takes to get your food gives you your lifestyle.

In the 1930s, getting 100 barrels of oil took the energy of 1 barrel.

In the 1930s, 100 to 1
In the 1970s, 30 to 1
Now, it’s approximately 10 to 1

Canadian tar sands is  5 to 1
Biofuels is 2 to 1 (or less)

It takes approximately 6 to 1 to maintain our present, oil-based infrastructure.

Hot steam geothermal, like we have on the Big Island, might be 15 to 1. And its EROI will not decline for 500,000 years. Very few in the world are so fortunate.

Carl Bonham, head of UH Economic Research Organization (UHERO), was in Hilo recently for a Bank of Hawaii presentation. I asked him: If we were to use geothermal as our primary electrical base power for the Big Island, would we become more competitive to the rest of the world? He said yes.

Geothermal benefits all Big Islanders, from the rubbah slippah folk to the shiny shoe ones. It means more jobs and more money in people’s pockets.

What about growing biofuel?

Biofuel is traded on the world market. So we are in competition with producers the world over. The bottom line is that the producer with the best competitive advantages will have the most competitively priced product. When growing fuel crops, the best set of circumstances occurs when the production is concentrated an equal distant from the processing plant. A circular model works best. Intense sun energy, flat land and deep fertile soil with good irrigation gives one good advantages. These qualities rarely occur on the Big Island at the scale necessary for our farmers to compete on the world market.

What about small agriculture? When oil is $100 per barrel, each pound of that oil is worth 38 cents. If a farmer needs to grow 4 pounds of stuff to squeeze out 1 lb. of liquid, the most that farmer can expect is 9 and 1/2 cents per pound to grow the stuff.

Everything being equal, any farmer would prefer to grow something that makes more than 9 and 1/2 cents per pound.

Several years ago on the mainland, there were cellulosic biofuel projects that needed farmer-grown feedstock that cost no more than $45 per ton. But farmers were getting $100 per ton for hay. So they received a subsidy of $45 per ton.

In spite of that, and many many millions of dollars of subsidies, there is still no successful cellulosic biofuel project In Hawaii, farmers get $200 to $300 for hay. It’s unlikely they would choose to grow something for half the return. It’s all about numbers.

What about Big Island biodiesel? Although it’s challenging, I do think they have the best chance of enabling farmer-grown biofuels. They have a model that works. All they have to do is tell farmers the form they want the product delivered to them and the price they will pay. Enterprising farmers will figure it out.

What can we do to help farmers make money? We can start with affordable electricity. And there is nothing more affordable than geothermal. On the Big Island, it costs 21 cents per kilowatt hour to generate electricity from oil. It costs half that to generate electricity from geothermal. While the price of oil will keep on rising, geothermal energy will stay stable for hundreds of thousands of years.

Farmers and ranchers incur costs associated with refrigeration at the processing plants, the distribution system, retailers and home refrigerators. If farmers and ranchers have lower costs, they can compete more successfully against mainland imports. And if their customers have more money in their pockets, they can support locally grown foods.

Food security and fuel are closely tied together. Food security involves farmers farming. And if farmers make money, farmers will farm.

Uncategorized

Why Some Tomatoes Taste Bad, & Why Ours Don’t

3 Comments

Richard Ha writes:

We select our tomato varieties specifically for taste, and once we find a variety that tastes delicious, then we look at its other characteristics. For instance, we do not grow white varieties, because we have not found one that tastes good.
Once we find a variety we like, we control salinity and water volume to enhance its taste even more.
It is interesting to read what has happened to tomato taste over the years.
From UPI:
Published: June 29, 2012

WASHINGTON, June 29 (UPI) — The reason bright, uniformly red tomatoes in supermarkets lack the flavor to match their intense color is genetics, U.S. plant researchers say.

A gene mutation that makes a tomato uniformly red, favored by farmers as it produces a visually attractive product, stifles genes that would contribute to its taste, scientists said.

The chance mutation discovered by tomato breeders has been deliberately bred into almost all tomatoes for the color it provides.

Researchers writing in the journal Science report the gene that was inactivated by that mutation — resulting in a brighter uniform color — plays an important role in producing the sugar and aromas that are central to a flavorful tomato. Read the rest

And here’s another interesting article on the same subject from NPR:

June 28, 2012

by DAN CHARLES

Notice how some of these tomatoes have unripe-looking tops? Those “green shoulders” are actually the keys to flavor.

The tomato is the vegetable (or fruit, if you must) that we love to hate. We know how good it can be and how bad it usually is. And everybody just wants to know: How did it get that way?

Today, scientists revealed a small but intriguing chapter in that story: a genetic mutation that seemed like a real improvement in the tomato’s quality, but which actually undermined its taste. Read the rest

We are great fans of heirloom tomatoes. They taste great. I like them simply sliced and chilled with sea salt – sometimes with mozzarella cheese.

June and I loved to go to the Carmel Tomato festival, where we once had the chance to evaluate 200 varieties of heirloom tomatoes.
Geothermal

Hawaii Volcano Observatory on Geothermal for the Big Island

2 Comments

This “Volcano Watch” article, written by the Hawaii Volcano Observatory for the Hawaii Tribune-Herald, discusses geothermal on Hawai‘i Island and the importance of balancing geothermal’s considerable benefits with its potential risks.

VOLCANO WATCH: HVO weighs-in on geothermal development

June 28, 2012 

HAWAII VOLCANOES NATIONAL PARK, Hawaii: This week’s Volcano Watch article delves into geothermal development on Hawaii Island.

The Hawaiian Volcano Observatory has been somewhat quiet during the latest push for geothermal resource development.  This article does not endorse or oppose it, and it stays clear of hotly debated topics like community health, consumer cost benefit, or allotted royalties.

The article does urge caution, however, focusing on the island’s volcanic hazards, and the impact they could have on the potential energy boon to the Aloha State. Read the rest here

When we visited Iceland, we were shown an old diesel generator that had been in standby mode since the 1970s.

We would do the same thing here. As geothermal sites went online, our previous plants could be remain in standby mode. As additional, geographically dispersed, geothermal plants came online, the plants on standby could gradually be decommissioned.

Contest

Caption Contest Winners!

2 Comments

It’s blog editor Leslie Lang here with the winners of our caption contest.

Here is the picture for which we asked you to supply a caption:

Screen shot 2012-06-28 at 9.14.26 PM

You’ll recall that Richard asked me to choose the winner, ostensibly so he wouldn’t be swayed by friends or family. But now I’m thinking he just remembered how hard it is to pick a winner!

We had lots of entries, and there were some really clever ones. It was hard, but I narrowed them down. I stripped the names off my top four, showed Richard and tried to get him to help me decide which one was the best one.

He read them, laughed and announced a four-way tie.

So here are the four winning captions and the winners’ names. They are not in any order (except alphabetical):

• And the four little piggies cried ‘Auwe!’ all the way home  – Maia Nilsson

• Dinner on the run – Patrick Kahawaiolaa

• Finally, Porky was able to fulfill a lifelong dream: to recreate the cover of the Abbey Road album – Baron Sekiya

• Hey Ralph… are they stopping for us, or did that oil thing peak out? – Wally Andrade

Congratulations to Maia, Patrick, Baron and Wally. If you are on the Big Island, please call Richard at 960-1057 and make arrangements to pick up your prize: a box of fresh, mixed Hamakua Springs vegetables.

If you are not located here, then we send you our heartiest congratulations, and unless you have plans to come to the Big Island we’ll have to leave it at that (as we mentioned in the first post; sorry!).

And thanks to everybody for the submissions. It was fun.