Jul. 5--Idaho interests had mixed results in their lobbying efforts on the American Clean Energy and Security Act now being considered by the U.S. Senate.

Overall, the Congressional Budget Office predicted that the bill would cost the average American $175 annually. But supporters of the bill say climate change will force far more costs on Americans and the world if nothing is done.

The American Farm Bureau was neutral on the bill, but some Idaho farmers were more skeptical.

"There are a lot of farmers in Idaho that are concerned about what it will do for the national economy and domestic energy security," said Jake Putnam, Idaho Farm Bureau state media manager.

Still, farmers won key concessions in the bill -- including support for new standards to require utilities to get 15 percent of their power from wind, solar, geothermal or biomass power by 2020. Many of these plants will be built on farms that bring revenue to farmers, Putnam said.

The bill also includes "carbon offsets," which allow industrial polluters to meet emissions targets by buying carbon reductions from farms and forests. By capturing carbon with growing trees and special crops and by using other management techniques to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, farmers get another stream of revenue from the bill.

In the original bill, those offsets were to have been regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency, which the Farm Bureau strongly opposed, Putnam said. The final bill moved offset regulation over to the Department of Agriculture, which also pleased the The National Alliance of Forest Owners, headed by Boise native David Tenny.

Getting biomass power generated from wood recognized as renewable energy under the bill was a major victory for the forest owners. Private forests make up 1.2 million acres of Idaho's 22 million acres of forests -- so companies such as Potlatch and Forest Capital and even the state, which owns significant forest lands, can benefit both from the offsets and from a new biomass industry.

"Much to our surprise, it became a central issue to getting the bill through Congress," said Dan Whiting, spokesman for the forest owners alliance.

But the bill did not encourage the U.S. Forest Service to aid the biomass industry with longer term contracts that could help supply new biomass plants. It also failed to recognize hydroelectric and nuclear power as renewable resources under the standards.

The utility industry did get 35 percent of all carbon credits for free.

LaMont Keen, president and CEO of Idaho Power, who has been working with a national utility lobbying group, said Idaho Power still will have to pass some costs on to customers because it depends so much on coal.

He also hopes to convince the Senate to loosen the short- and mid-term emission caps to allow an easier transition. And he worries that a new market for carbon -- the "cap and trade" provision that Idaho's congressional leaders oppose -- could produce price volatility through manipulation the same way oil futures markets have affected oil prices.

Rocky Barker: 377-6484

-----

To see more of the Idaho Statesman, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.idahostatesman.com

Copyright (c) 2009, The Idaho Statesman, Boise

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.

A service of YellowBrix, Inc.