One of the most important aspects of my business is taking advantage of opportunities that secure my bottom line, strengthen the economy and foster a cleaner environment. That’s why this week, I’m taking a brief leave of absence from running my business, Expedite Renewable Energy, and heading to Washington, DC to make sure my representatives are focusing on policies that improve my business while protecting the environment and human health. 

Politicians like to talk about how they stand up for small businesses, but sometimes it’s hard to figure out if their actions jive with their rhetoric. One way I can tell if someone’s walk matches their talk is if they support laws that create an atmosphere conducive to small business growth, such as the Clean Air Act.

The Clean Air Act has ushered in more than 40 years of technological innovation, job creation and expanded U.S. exports—things that benefit small business owners like myself and lay the foundation for long-term economic growth benefiting us all. But the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), responsible for enforcing the Clean Air Act, is coming under threat from members of Congress who would limit its ability to do its job. Specifically, the EPA is preparing to update clean air standards and reduce the amount of the toxic pollution in the air that leads to increased health related-problems and fewer opportunities for small businesses. Nationwide, the new EPA standards would save as much as $100 billion a year once they are fully implemented. 

But some lawmakers are working overtime to delay these new standards and to gut old ones by any means possible. As a small business owner who wants to help this country become a global leader in clean energy, I simply can’t support any member of Congress who wants to tear the Clean Air Act down.

Millions of us heard President Barack Obama during his State of the Union address last month say, “We need to get behind this innovation. And to help pay for it, I’m asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but they’re doing just fine on their own. So instead of subsidizing yesterday’s energy, let’s invest in tomorrow’s.”

Makes sense, but how do you reverse more than sixty years of bad policy that pours more than $10 billion annually into subsidies to the oil, gas and coal industries?  For starters, we can focus on the impact it would have on reducing the deficit—something all party lines can stand behind.  Second, as more Americans come to realize that their tax dollars support polluting industries that are reporting record profits, proliferate climate change and put a false price tag on their energy usage, they will demand accountability and support policy makers that will right the wrong.

In a compelling article, Get the Energy Sector Off the Dole, in the Washington Monthly, Jeffrey Leonard suggests that eliminating all government energy subsidies and tax credits for non-renewable and renewable energy sources will level the playing field and allow the free market to drive new energy technologies.  According to the article, about 70 percent of all federal energy subsidies goes toward oil, natural gas and coal, 15 percent to ethanol, 10 percent to large hydro-power and 5 percent to renewables.  Eliminating all subsidies will help make wind, solar and other green energy cost competitive.

Renewable Energy installers in the U.S. and Ohio are holding their breath as the U.S. and Ohio Senate consider incentives that will greatly impact the renewable energy industry. On the federal level, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) unveiled a bipartisan tax package bill Thursday evening that includes an extension of the Section 1603 cash grant giving renewable energy investors a 30 percent investment tax credit on qualified project costs. In Ohio, the House passed Rep. Mike Foley's (D-Cleve.) sponsored bill HB 301, that extends the Advanced Energy Fund for three years, a grant program that is vital to the future of distributed generation projects in the state.

The 1603 Treasury Grant Program is necessary to help level the playing field between the fossil fuel industry and renewables. Since the fossil fuel industry is so highly subsidized by the federal government, it is impossible for solar, wind and other renewable industries to compete without incentives. If Section 1603, found in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, is not renewed it will greatly reduce the number of renewable energy projects installed in the U.S. and put us further behind other nations in the manufacturing of renewable energy technologies and commitment to reducing carbon emissions. According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), failure to extend the 1603 program could cost the U.S. 15,000 renewable energy jobs.

At a telephone press conference today, authors of "An Economic Analysis of the Wayne National Forest Plan," a new study by Greenfire, LLC, commissioned by the regional forest protection organization Heartwood, discussed their conclusions that the U.S. Forest Service’s (USFS) 15-year management plan for southern Ohio’s Wayne National Forest (WNF)––Ohio’s only national forest––does not maximize net public benefits as required by law.

Study co-author, economist Christine Glaser, PhD, stated that the plan “does not create a net public benefit,” because both monetary and nonmonetary public costs are greater than public benefits. Andy Mahler, Heartwood Coordinator, summed up: “It’s really the worst of both worlds. Not only are we getting a degraded and cut-over public forest, but we are wasting tax money and preventing more desirable benefits from the forest in the process.”

The study evaluated costs of running USFS operations and found that “logging, mining, and off-highway vehicle (OHV) trails cost the Forest Service more than is coming back in revenues.” They also found that extensive pollution costs result from Forest Service plans to log more than 18,000 acres and to burn 68,000 acres (over a quarter of the Wayne) in the next ten years, as well as to expand OHV trails by over 100 miles.

The authors challenged the rationale for logging, burning, and OHVs on economic and environmental grounds. The study points out that Southeast Ohio has one of the highest air pollution levels in the nation, that four Wayne counties are in noncompliance with EPA particulate standards, and that OHVs are high emitters of particulates, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and nitrous oxides (NOx). The authors also found high costs in lost ecosystem services from FS activities.