Ohio is at an energy crossroads: We can join states and countries that are broadening their options by encouraging the development of wind, solar and other alternative sources, or we can protect the status quo and ignore innovations. The latter path is all too comfortable to current state lawmakers.
Two pending bills help frame the issues. Senate Bill 238 would reverse a 2014 law change that significantly increased the setback, or distance that wind turbines must be from neighboring properties. That meant wind-farm developers couldn't put as many turbines (and make as much money) on a given piece of property, and new wind-farm applications essentially have dried up since.
Passing the bill, and returning setbacks to something close to what they were in 2014, likely would breathe new life into Ohio wind development.
House Bill 114, on the other hand, would take Ohio backward by turning the state's renewable-energy standards — a requirement that, by 2026, 12.5 percent of the power sold by utilities come from renewable sources — into voluntary targets. It was approved by the House in March and sits in the Senate.
Its chief proponent, Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, doggedly opposes any government mandates or support for renewable-energy development. He points out that renewable energy typically costs more per unit to generate than power from coal, oil and natural gas and says we should "let the market decide" Ohio's energy mix.
The argument is short-sighted. Technological improvement is steadily shrinking the cost of renewables, and research is accelerated by standards that spur more companies to the field. States that sit back and wait for the cost to come down risk being left out of a thriving industry of the future.
Just as important, replacing fossil fuels with renewables has value beyond dollars and cents, offering the prospect of cleaner air and water and less of the environmental destruction that comes with mining and drilling.
The wind-setback bill is a more-delicate matter. Stricter setbacks came about because living very close to a wind turbine brings noise, a giant visual obstruction and other effects that many neighbors find unpleasant. Some alleged health effects haven't been proved, but the intrusion is real, and lawmakers must consider neighbors' concerns.
But the solution can't be to rule out an important potential power source and shut down a nascent industry, not to mention depriving Ohio landowners of the right to profit from their property.
Lawmakers should look for a way to restore Ohio's wind-energy prospects while providing reasonable protection or compensation for neighbors who are affected.
Statehouse conservatives have been wary of wholeheartedly supporting renewable energy, but they shouldn't be. Fossil-fuel energy will be around for some time, but renewable energy is the future, and Republican voters apparently recognize this even if their representatives in Columbus don't.
The Ohio Conservative Energy Forum, a pro-renewables group, released a poll Jan. 10 conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a Republican polling firm. They surveyed only self-described conservatives and Republicans and found that large majorities support pro-renewable policies.
Ohio voters want to move into the future; their leaders should, too.
GATEHOUSE MEDIA OHIO