Hawaii 2025 Regular Session

Hawaii Senate Bill SCR122 Compare Versions

Only one version of the bill is available at this time.

Old	New	Differences
1	1	THE SENATE S.C.R. NO. 122 THIRTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE, 2025 STATE OF HAWAII SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REQUESTING A COMMITMENT TO A nuclear-free, SUSTAINABLE FUTURE.
2	2
3	3	THE SENATE S.C.R. NO. 122
4	4	THIRTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE, 2025
5	5	STATE OF HAWAII
6	6
7	7	THE SENATE
8	8
9	9	S.C.R. NO.
10	10
11	11	122
12	12
13	13	THIRTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE, 2025
14	14
15	15
16	16
17	17	STATE OF HAWAII
18	18
19	19
20	20
21	21
22	22
23	23
24	24
25	25
26	26
27	27
28	28
29	29	SENATE CONCURRENT
30	30
31	31	RESOLUTION
32	32
33	33
34	34
35	35
36	36
37	37	REQUESTING A COMMITMENT TO A nuclear-free, SUSTAINABLE FUTURE.
38	38
39	39
40	40
41	41
42	42
43	43	WHEREAS, Hawaii has a constitutional ban on nuclear power. Hawaiis constitution explicitly prohibits nuclear fission power plants without legislative approval (Article XI, Section 8). This critical provision protects the health and safety of Hawaiis residents and reflects long-standing public opposition to nuclear energy; and WHEREAS, the County of Hawaii has already enacted ordinances banning nuclear energy, signifying the communitys dedication to safer, cleaner alternatives; and WHEREAS, transporting nuclear fuel is a hazard. As an isolated island chain, Hawaii faces unique and significant risks in transporting nuclear fuel over vast ocean distances. Any accidents during transport could have catastrophic consequences for Hawaiis pristine marine environment and tourism-dependent economy; and WHEREAS, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the emergency planning zone around a nuclear power plant typically extends to a 10-mile radius for immediate radiation exposure concerns, while a broader "ingestion pathway" zone reaches out to a 50-mile radius where food and water contamination could occur in the event of an incident. This would make safely siting a power plant, particularly on Oahu, impossible; and WHEREAS, Hawaiis geological instability, including frequent earthquakes, volcanic activity, and tsunami risks, makes it an unsafe location for storing nuclear waste. There are no viable long-term solutions for safely containing radioactive materials in such a volatile environment. Moreover, a nuclear waste facility that would contain lethal radioactive waste must be, according to scientists, maintained and funded for at least 200,000 years; and WHEREAS, the cost of nuclear disasters is immense and multifaceted, encompassing direct costs like cleanup operations, property damage, and evacuation efforts, as well as significant indirect costs including long-term health consequences, economic disruption due to lost productivity and tourism, and severe psychological impacts on affected populations, often lasting for generations. We must look no further than major events like Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima to understand the vast scale of these costs, with estimates reaching hundreds of billions of dollars due to the complexity of managing radioactive contamination and the social repercussions of such disasters; and WHEREAS, Integral Fast Reactors, Pebble Bed Modular Reactors, Thorium Fueled Reactors, Molten Salt Reactors, and Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are not viable. Proponents of SMRs and these other so called new types of reactors fail to address their unproven nature, unresolved safety risks, and economic inefficiency. Cost estimates to build them have been described as eye-popping. Moreover, these technologies remain largely theoretical and lack adequate testing. Waiting for such reactors to materialize would forestall much faster and cheaper climate solutions. Additionally, the push for SMRs often serves the private interests of billionaires looking to power AI data centers rather than benefiting the people of Hawaii; and WHEREAS, the Hawaii State Energy Office has already indicated nuclear energy would be an expensive form of energy for Hawaii, and therefore, would be a distraction from Hawaii achieving our clean energy goals; and WHEREAS, the nuclear industry touting nuclear energy as "carbon-free electricity" is factually inaccurate. Even existing reactors emit greenhouse gas emissions due to the continuous mining and refining of uranium needed for the reactor; and WHEREAS, Hawaii is already on the path to achieving 100% renewable energy by 2045 through Act 97 (2015). Nuclear energy is not renewable, requires costly infrastructure, and pursuing it would divert attention and resources from proven, sustainable solutions like solar, and wind; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the Senate of the Thirty-third Legislature of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 2025, the House of Representatives concurring, that this body commits to uphold Hawaiis constitution, a sustainable future, prioritize investing our resources in a clean renewable energy future, and honor the voices of its people by opposing the use of nuclear energy in Hawaii; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this Concurrent Resolution be transmitted to the Governor; Attorney General; Chairperson of the Board of Land and Natural Resources; Director of the Office of Planning; and mayors of the City and County of Honolulu and counties of Hawaii, Kauai, and Maui. OFFERED BY: _____________________________ Report Title: COMMITMENT TO A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE
44	44
45	45	WHEREAS, Hawaii has a constitutional ban on nuclear power. Hawaiis constitution explicitly prohibits nuclear fission power plants without legislative approval (Article XI, Section 8). This critical provision protects the health and safety of Hawaiis residents and reflects long-standing public opposition to nuclear energy; and
46	46
47	47
48	48
49	49	WHEREAS, the County of Hawaii has already enacted ordinances banning nuclear energy, signifying the communitys dedication to safer, cleaner alternatives; and
50	50
51	51
52	52
53	53	WHEREAS, transporting nuclear fuel is a hazard. As an isolated island chain, Hawaii faces unique and significant risks in transporting nuclear fuel over vast ocean distances. Any accidents during transport could have catastrophic consequences for Hawaiis pristine marine environment and tourism-dependent economy; and
54	54
55	55
56	56
57	57	WHEREAS, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the emergency planning zone around a nuclear power plant typically extends to a 10-mile radius for immediate radiation exposure concerns, while a broader "ingestion pathway" zone reaches out to a 50-mile radius where food and water contamination could occur in the event of an incident. This would make safely siting a power plant, particularly on Oahu, impossible; and
58	58
59	59
60	60
61	61	WHEREAS, Hawaiis geological instability, including frequent earthquakes, volcanic activity, and tsunami risks, makes it an unsafe location for storing nuclear waste. There are no viable long-term solutions for safely containing radioactive materials in such a volatile environment. Moreover, a nuclear waste facility that would contain lethal radioactive waste must be, according to scientists, maintained and funded for at least 200,000 years; and
62	62
63	63
64	64
65	65	WHEREAS, the cost of nuclear disasters is immense and multifaceted, encompassing direct costs like cleanup operations, property damage, and evacuation efforts, as well as significant indirect costs including long-term health consequences, economic disruption due to lost productivity and tourism, and severe psychological impacts on affected populations, often lasting for generations. We must look no further than major events like Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima to understand the vast scale of these costs, with estimates reaching hundreds of billions of dollars due to the complexity of managing radioactive contamination and the social repercussions of such disasters; and
66	66
67	67
68	68
69	69	WHEREAS, Integral Fast Reactors, Pebble Bed Modular Reactors, Thorium Fueled Reactors, Molten Salt Reactors, and Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are not viable. Proponents of SMRs and these other so called new types of reactors fail to address their unproven nature, unresolved safety risks, and economic inefficiency. Cost estimates to build them have been described as eye-popping. Moreover, these technologies remain largely theoretical and lack adequate testing. Waiting for such reactors to materialize would forestall much faster and cheaper climate solutions. Additionally, the push for SMRs often serves the private interests of billionaires looking to power AI data centers rather than benefiting the people of Hawaii; and
70	70
71	71
72	72
73	73	WHEREAS, the Hawaii State Energy Office has already indicated nuclear energy would be an expensive form of energy for Hawaii, and therefore, would be a distraction from Hawaii achieving our clean energy goals; and
74	74
75	75
76	76
77	77	WHEREAS, the nuclear industry touting nuclear energy as "carbon-free electricity" is factually inaccurate. Even existing reactors emit greenhouse gas emissions due to the continuous mining and refining of uranium needed for the reactor; and
78	78
79	79
80	80
81	81	WHEREAS, Hawaii is already on the path to achieving 100% renewable energy by 2045 through Act 97 (2015). Nuclear energy is not renewable, requires costly infrastructure, and pursuing it would divert attention and resources from proven, sustainable solutions like solar, and wind; now, therefore,
82	82
83	83
84	84
85	85	BE IT RESOLVED by the Senate of the Thirty-third Legislature of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 2025, the House of Representatives concurring, that this body commits to uphold Hawaiis constitution, a sustainable future, prioritize investing our resources in a clean renewable energy future, and honor the voices of its people by opposing the use of nuclear energy in Hawaii; and
86	86
87	87
88	88
89	89	BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this Concurrent Resolution be transmitted to the Governor; Attorney General; Chairperson of the Board of Land and Natural Resources; Director of the Office of Planning; and mayors of the City and County of Honolulu and counties of Hawaii, Kauai, and Maui.
90	90
91	91
92	92
93	93
94	94
95	95
96	96
97	97	OFFERED BY: _____________________________
98	98
99	99
100	100
101	101	OFFERED BY:
102	102
103	103	_____________________________
104	104
105	105
106	106
107	107
108	108
109	109
110	110
111	111
112	112
113	113
114	114
115	115	Report Title:
116	116
117	117	COMMITMENT TO A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE