State must not derail progress on energy efficiency
This opinion is on behalf of the editorial board: Publisher Margaret Buchanan, Editor Carolyn Washburn, and writers Cindi Andrews, Krista Ramsey and Julie Zimmerman.
The Ohio General Assembly is taking another run at scuttling the state’s energy-savings standards – standards that have been working since 2008. Stopping progress on energy efficiency now would be a step backward, and it would send a message to small companies that Ohio’s policies are unpredictable, something no business wants to see.
The standards are designed to curb energy use and pollution and to eliminate the need to build more coal-fired power plants. They require utilities to use more renewable energy sources like wind and solar and require factories to cut their electricity usage.
As lawmakers debate whether to freeze the standards, it’s helpful to look at the example set by the U.S. military. The Department of Defense is the country’s largest consumer of energy. In the past few years the department and all branches of the military have set ambitious goals for weaning themselves off imported energy, or energy that poses security risks or pollutes. Its goals include:
• By 2016, the Air Force hopes to get half of its domestic aviation fuel from alternative blends.
• By 2020, the Navy expects to have 50 percent of its total energy consumption come from alternative sources.
• By 2025, the Army aims to have 30 installations that produce as much energy as they consume.
In comparison, the Ohio standards aim for 25 percent of energy by 2025 to be renewable or produced through “advanced technologies.”
Military leaders are clear about why they’re adopting these goals: Making energy more efficient and renewable can improve security, protect from price fluctuations, reduce long-term costs and improve the safety of troops who must protect energy-supply lines.
Those reasons apply to Ohio’s energy standards, as well. The energy standards are largely supported by consumer groups, which say they lower prices for average customers, and by many small manufacturers, environmentalists and renewable-energy startups. Large manufacturers, business groups and traditional utilities generally oppose the standards.
Last year Ohio lawmakers, led by Sen. Bill Seitz, R-Green Township, and Rep. Peter Stautberg, R-Anderson Township, tried to loosen the mandates. The new bill in the Legislature, S.B. 310, would freeze the standards to allow lawmakers to study whether the standards are accomplishing what they intended. A committee of advocates on both sides of the issue would be created to deliberate on whether to leave the mandates in place, loosen them or get rid of them entirely.
The committee would recommend a solution to the General Assembly, which would then act on their recommendations. Supporters of the standards fear that a pause will lead to permanent dismissal of the standards.
Last month, Indiana became the first state to kill an energy-efficiency law, while Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Missouri and Wisconsin are all actively promoting efficiency measures.
Ohio lawmakers who support freezing the standards say the mandates have cost consumers and businesses money, and that the large increase in available natural gas has changed the energy outlook for the state. Consumer groups and organizations that represent small manufacturers maintain the standards have saved money for their members.
As for the argument about natural gas, while it’s preferable to coal and other fossil fuels, it isn’t the sole long-term solution to Ohio’s energy needs. Renewables and efficiency are essential strategies in any state’s efforts to lower costs long term and minimize damage to the environment.
It’s a good idea to study whether the standards can be improved, but freezing them would likely mean their end. What’s more, these regular attempts to undo the mandates increase uncertainty among businesses, which need predictability to confidently make long-term investments.
By improving efficiency and increasing the share of renewables in Ohio’s energy portfolio, the state can protect itself from volatility and increase its energy security. The standards are also helping to create jobs and attract investment to Ohio, even as they lower energy usage and costs for many consumers. It’s a strategy that protects Ohioans’ long-term security, health, environment and finances.
If that strategy is good enough for the U.S. military, Ohio lawmakers ought to explain why it’s not good enough for the rest of us. ■