Dodging an LNG Bullet? $1B Spreadsheet Calculation Error Upends Hawaiʻi Energy Office’s Push for Liquified NaturalGas

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, March 12, 2026

CONTACT: Wayne Chung Tanaka, (808)490-8579, wayne.tanaka@sierraclub.org

HONOLULU, HAWAIʻI – A major blow appears to have been dealt to the Hawaiʻi State  Energy Office’s primary justification for recommending a billion-plus dollar investment in  liquified natural gas (LNG) infrastructure, after a bombshell revelation at the Hawaiʻi  State Legislature today. 

For over a year, the Energy Office, Hawaiʻi Governor Josh Green, representatives of  Japanese methane distributor JERA, and local communications and lobbying firms have  touted the value of bringing LNG, or methane, to Hawaiʻi as a “bridge” fuel. Proponents  have primarily cited the benefits of LNG’s lower energy costs, as the islands work to meet their renewable energy portfolio goals. 

Heavily featured in slide deck presentations and on the Energy Office’s website is a  cost-benefit graph suggesting that Hawaiʻi would realize $700M to $800M in net savings with a pivot to LNG, under certain conditions. This graph is found under “Scenario 3A” in  the Energy Office’s Alternative Fuels, Repowering, and Energy Transition Study,  published in January of 2025. 

These purported savings, however, fail to incorporate nearly $900 million in LNG fuel  costs, according to former University of Hawaiʻi engineering professor and Energy  Innovations Director of Global Policy Research Matthias Fripp, in an informational  briefing before the House Energy & Environmental Protection Committee. This was due  to an error in a spreadsheet used to calculate the cost-benefits of LNG, which had been  shared with him by the Energy Office, according to Fripp.  

When the Energy Office failed to respond to his questions regarding the apparent error,  Fripp consulted several other experts who agreed with his assessment. He even tried  increasing the assumed cost of LNG in the spreadsheet by orders of magnitude, to see  if the cost-benefit projections would change. 

“I went into the place where the LNG [cost] forecasts are and I multiplied them by like a  100 . . . and the graph was unchanged,” Fripp explained. “It was clear you could do  whatever you wanted with the price of LNG and it wouldn’t affect the reported savings.”

As a result of this error, along with a handful of other faulty assumptions and omissions, the Energy Office’s most optimistic cost-benefit scenario of up to $800 million in overall  savings could actually result in up to $300 - $400 million or more in net costs. These  costs would almost certainly be passed on to electrical grid customers.  

Energy and environmental organizations like 350 Hawaiʻi, Ililani Media, Blue Planet  Alliance, and the Sierra Club of Hawaiʻi have heavily criticized the Energy Office’s LNG  recommendations, as well as the Governor’s full-throated endorsement of LNG beginning as early as May 2024. Major concerns on the cost-benefit aspect alone have  included the high potential for cost overruns in a massive LNG infrastructure project; the  risk of unexpected repair and maintenance costs; the price volatility of LNG; and the  lack of existing or foreseeable future technology that would let power plants readily switch between LNG and “green” hydrogen. 

Fripp’s spreadsheet error revelation means that even ignoring these issues, LNG would  be a losing proposition for Hawaiʻi residents and their pocketbooks. 

“We are immensely appreciative for the courage Dr. Fripp showed today to speak the  truth, no matter how uncomfortable it was,” said Sherry Pollack, of 350 Hawaiʻi. “His  efforts toward assessing the implications and impacts of HSEO's LNG plans are  critically important to everyone who calls Hawaii home.” 

Prior to today’s revelation, a coalition of 50 high-profile businesses and organizations, from a local brewery, to development firms, to a houseless village, had announced its  support of bringing LNG to Hawaiʻi. 

“I don’t blame local businesses and nonprofits for falling for the one-sided pitch thrown at them by the state and LNG industry special interests,” said Wayne Tanaka, executive  director of the Sierra Club of Hawaiʻi. “The State Energy Office, the Governor, and  anyone paid off by the LNG industry, however, should be deeply embarrassed for their  part in promoting this half-baked scheme.”  

“Unfortunately, costs to consumers are just the tip of the LNG iceberg. I encourage  everyone, including those who might have bought into this LNG proposal, to do their  own research, and to reach out to the Sierra Club for ideas on the kinds of questions we  all should be asking the Governor and his advisors.”  

- ## -