Business vs. clean energy

Mar 7, 2010 — The Columbus Dispatch

Jack Torry

Mar. 7, 2010 (McClatchy-Tribune Regional News delivered by Newstex) -- WASHINGTON -- The letter last week to Sen. Sherrod Brown was signed by executives from some of the largest companies and business organizations in Ohio -- including FirstEnergy (NYSE:FE) of Akron, the Timken Company (NYSE:TKR) of Canton, the Ohio Manufacturers' Association and the Ohio Chamber of Commerce.

In pointed language, the authors urged Brown to back a bill that would prevent the U.S. Environmental Agency from regulating the greenhouse gasses thought to cause climate change, warning in near-apocalyptic terms that "the future of Ohio may depend on this vote."

The letter was signed by

25 executives, right down to the head of J's Pizza Market in Mentor. And it vividly illustrates the pressure that Ohio lawmakers, whose state gets about 86 percent of its electricity from coal-fired power plants, face from industries to oppose new restrictions on emissions of carbon dioxide -- either from Congress approving new laws or the EPA issuing regulations.

Although environmentalists are wary of Brown's support of technology designed to allow utility companies to burn Ohio coal without emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, they largely back the senator, who likes to boast that "Ohio really is on the road to being the Silicon Valley of alternative energy."

In contrast to Brown, environmentalists view other state officials with deep skepticism. While Brown wants the EPA to wait one year before acting, Republican Sen. George V. Voinovich and Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland both outright oppose EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson issuing new regulations that would restrict carbon-dioxide emissions.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-West Chester, introduced a resolution last week to block her action. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, has introduced a similar bill, while Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., unveiled a measure that would delay any EPA action for two years.

And in a move that worried some environmentalists, Brown joined Rockefeller to warn Jackson that they had "serious economic and energy security concerns" about the EPA imposing new regulations. The two urged the agency to wait until Congress approves its own climate-change measure -- though Brown stopped short at signing on to Rockefeller's bill.

"I'm a little disappointed in that recent letter that he and Rockefeller put together," said Frank O'Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, based in Washington. "The bottom line is he co-signed a letter that had the appearance of pressuring the EPA to delay action."

David Leland, former chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party, said he has "known Sherrod since we were in our 20s, and I can't think of a person more likely to be pro-environment and pro-new industry than him. But he also has to represent 11 million people in Ohio, and some of them don't feel that way."

Even President Barack Obama has come under criticism from environmentalists for his backing of clean coal and nuclear power. Although Obama endorsed both in his 2008 presidential campaign, Strickland said, Obama probably has "surprised some in the environmental community who simply believe all of our efforts should be directed" toward energy efficiency or renewable energy.

For example, Obama's

$787 billion economic-stimulus package allowed Columbus-based American Electric Power (NYSE:AEP) to receive more than $334 million for a carbon-capture and storage project in West Virginia. The administration also called for spending $9.4 million on clean-coal technology in 2011 in Ohio, although it was a decline from the $15.7million Ohio got this year.

The moves have delighted Voinovich, who called Energy Secretary Steven Chu a "real advocate" for pumping more money into clean-coal technology and nuclear power even as the Republican hits the administration for its attempt to regulate greenhouse gases.

No one has worked harder at striking a balance between environmentalists and industry groups than Brown. While expressing deep misgivings about a global-warming bill approved last year by the House, he is working with Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina on an alternative that would provide incentives to develop cleaner energy, such as nuclear power, wind and solar.

Brown described curbing global warming as one of the "great moral challenges of this generation." But in the next breath he will say, "It's a bit 20th-century to say it's a choice between jobs and the environment. That's what companies used to say and get away with. I think climate change is the best example of how they come together. This can be a jobs bill."

So far, talk like that has kept most environmentalists happy. Teresa McHugh, senior field-organizing manager for the Ohio Sierra Club, said Brown "appears to be working in many areas to reach solutions that are both going to be good for the environment and good for the economy in Ohio."

But he risks alienating environmentalists if he sides with industry and prevents -- or at least delays -- the EPA from regulating greenhouse gasses. And even though for years he opposed the development of nuclear power, he now says it is "safer than it was 10 or 15 years ago."

Such talk dismays many environmentalists. McHugh said, "We need to pursue the cleanest, fastest, cheapest and safest technologies. Nuclear is none of those. Nuclear is very expensive, we don't have a place to put the nuclear waste, and it doesn't have a great safety record."

jriskind@dispatch.com

Newstex ID: KRTB-0147-42651132