Will Ohio miss the ‘green’ boat?

'Everybody can't be a coach'
6/24/11
Thumbs up as Santa look-alike loses his locks
6/24/11
Charles Krauthammer: U.S. needs a new way to decide when we’re at war
6/24/11
Treasurer: ‘County finances can be rather complex’
6/24/11
> More opinion headlines

11:12 AM Monday, November 2, 2009

The debate about climate change has developed civil war elements. People claiming to speak for the Heartland are saying: Whatever impact pending legislation might have on the two coasts — where most of the political support comes from — it would be disaster for states like Ohio, which are especially dependent on coal and manufacturing.

If you put restraints on carbon emissions associated with coal, you hurt Ohio.

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a “cap-and-trade” bill. It sets a national limit on the amount of carbon that can be released, then allows companies that can’t reduce their emissions to buy credits to release more.

Republican House leader John Boehner has said it would raise energy costs in Ohio — and worse. Specifically, he says it would put AK Steel out of business.

In September, Reps. Steve Austria , R-Beavercreek, and Jean Schmidt, R-Loveland, joined him at a Republican-sponsored hearing in Columbus to highlight these points.

All along, proponents have said the bill would — on balance — create jobs, by fostering new energy businesses and by fostering energy conservation, allowing money to be diverted in other directions.

Now comes a study that says the positive economic impact would not only be bigger than the negative, but would actually be greatest in states like Ohio.

“Heartland states will gain more by reducing imported fossil fuel dependence because they are generally spending a higher proportion of their income on this low-employment, high-price” source, says the study.

The point is that Ohio doesn’t produce oil, but it could produce plenty of sustainable energy forms, such as solar and wind, thus fostering new industries and keeping its money at home.

The study was done primarily by the University of California at Berkeley, and was funded by The Energy Foundation, which describes itself as a partnership of foundations interested in sustainable energy.

Promoting the study locally is the Ohio Business Council for a Clean Economy, an organization of businesses interested in the “green” field.

As for oil, Ohio uses more than it digs, says the study’s main author, David Roland-Holst. And, he says, the fossil fuel industry produces relatively few jobs, and they pay poorly.

Ohio businesses and universities are poised to move into the new world of sustainable energy in a big way. Central State University and the University of Dayton are among the eight designated as having “Ohio Centers of Excellence” in specific “green collar” realms. They’re participating in a state effort to have all electricity sold in Ohio by 2025 come from advanced or renewable resources.

Still, this country is falling behind others in the new technologies. Professor Roland-Holst says the great threat ahead for Ohio is not that its coal and manufacturing industries will be hurt by new laws, but that the state will miss the “green” boat while focusing on coal.

He recognizes that industry’s problems, but says it has been like the auto industry — which, for example, fought higher gas-mileage standards for many years — in failing to adjust to modern times.

The coal industry points to cap-and-trade studies with different conclusions than this one. Unquestionably, there will be downsides to cap-and-trade. Some attention must be focused on problems of communities now most dependent on the coal industry now.

But the times are changing. There will be winners and losers. Ohio can fear that, or it can recognize that few other states are more in need of change than Ohio.

Cox News Service

Share this article