COLUMBUS — Lawmakers want to provide financial and other incentives to get a new coal-fired power plant built in Ohio — a move they say will give the state the cheaper energy it needs to attract more business.

        “We've got hundreds of years of coal in the ground here,” said Senate President Richard Finan, R-Evendale. “We need to make use of it.”

        One of about a dozen companies considering building a new coal plant is Cinergy Corp., which provides electricity to 1.5 million customers in southern Ohio and Northern Kentucky. Cinergy spokesman David Woodburn said the idea makes sense because coal is inexpensive and energy use is increasing by about 2 percent a year in Ohio.

        “There is no doubt the demand for energy is going up and will continue to rise as the population increases and the economy expands,” Mr. Woodburn said.

        Coal fuels 56 percent of the nation's electricity but 84 percent of the electricity in Ohio, making the state the third-largest consumer of coal. Ohio hasn't had a new coal plant since the Zimmer

        station near Moscow was converted from nuclear power to coal in 1991.

        Mr. Woodburn declined to say where Cinergy might build but said it also would be looking in Indiana or Kentucky, depending on tax incentives and key issues such as environmental rules. Officials say building a new coal plant could cost $700 million or more, depending on the size.

        “Anybody who is putting in a coal-fired plant is concerned about regulations,” Mr. Woodburn said. “It's a big outlay of money to build a power plant. And you want firm regulatory ground to stand on.”

        Mr. Woodburn said Cinergy already plans to spend $700 million in the next 13 years on new pollution control equipment for its 11 coal-fired plants in Ohio and its neighboring states. He said constantly changing environmental regulations make new investments into plants potentially risky.

        “You don't want to be three years into an eight-year project and have the landscape change and find out it's going to cost more,” Mr. Woodburn said.

        Mr. Finan said he often hears such concerns. He said industry officials have told him they are willing to build a plant that meets all the latest environmental standards. But in return, they want an agreement allowing them to operate with that same technology for 10 to 15 years.

        “I think that's a fair deal,” Mr. Finan said.

        He added the state should work with the federal Environmental Protection Agency to address such issues so Ohio can move forward with a new plant. The sooner one opens, he said, the more competitive Ohio will be.

        “People in California may start to look around and say, "This sunshine is great but we can't manufacture without electrici ty,'” he said. “They'll say, "Where is there a good and fairly inexpensive supply of electricity and water? Ohio. Maybe snow isn't so bad.'”

        That argument could be a tough sell, according to Ellen Berman, president of the Consumer Energy Council of America, a Washington, D.C., policy group. Ms. Berman said California is planning to build its own plants in the next few years.

        “I would caution (lawmakers) not to think California is going to be as desperate three or four years from now as it is today,” she said.

        Still, she and others say, it makes sense for Ohio to look at its own power needs. On a normal summer day the state has a reserve power capacity of about 11 percent. More capacity is being added through plants that use natural gas to provide power during peak periods.

        Despite such reserves, however, Alan Schriber, chairman of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio and the Power Siting Board, said Ohio needs a new coal-fired plant because coal provides cheaper energy.

        Without a new plant, he said, the state would have to keep relying on plants that go on line only during peak times and use natural gas to provide energy. Officials say it could take at least 10 years to get a new plant opened.

        “Coal plants are desirable because they cost less to operate,” Mr. Schriber said. “If natural gas were dirt cheap, we'd build more gas plants but we need to diversify. We'd like to have a good mix, and we have a lot of coal in Ohio.”'

        While coal may be plentiful, Bryan Clark, a lobbyist for Ohio Public Research Interest Group, a group focused on consumer and environmental issues, said it is also extremely dirty, regardless of improved technology.

        “Clean coal simply does not exist. It will always be a dirty, unsustainable energy source,” Mr. Clark said.

        He said Ohio's leaders should be spending more time and money on encouraging plants powered by solar and wind energy. Research has shown that a wind-powered plant would be feasible along the shores of Lake Erie, Mr. Clark said.

        “Already in Ohio, thousands of people go to the hospital for asthma attacks related to poor air quality,” he said. “When you are talking about more coal-fired plants, you are talking about bringing in more of the air pollutants we need to decrease in Ohio, not increase.”

        Marilyn Wall, conservation chairwoman for the Sierra Club's Ohio Chapter, said lawmakers would be better off putting resources into conservation instead of tax incentives for energy companies.

        She said Ohioans could dramatically cut back energy usage if the state spent more on conservation programs and required new homes and buildings to be more energy efficient. She also criticized the plan to lobby the EPA to exempt companies from enacting new technologies as they become available to protect the environment.

        “Typically (the energy) industry has gotten enormous amounts of time to comply with environmental regulations,” Ms. Wall said. “People knew acid rain was a problem decades ago, yet they had years to comply with the regulations that finally came.”

        State Rep. Gary Cates, R-West Chester, disagrees. He said the continued rolling blackouts in California illustrate that states cannot conserve their way out of a shortage of electricity.

        “The best way to keep what you have is to have an abundant source of energy,” said Mr. Cates, who is second-in-command in the House. “We need to get a new power plant on line in Ohio.”
       

TOP CONSUMERS
               Ohio is the third-largest consumer of coal in the nation. Here's how much coal the top five states consumed in 2000, according to the U.S. Department of Energy:

        Texas: 98.3 million tons

        Indiana: 68.7 million tons

        Ohio: 58.5 million tons

        Alabama: 39.8 million tons

        West Virginia: 38.6 million tons
       

ENERGY SOURCES
               Ohioans use energy from a variety of sources. Here is where it comes from:

        • Coal: 84 percent

        • Nuclear: 8 percent

        • Gas: 6 percent

        • Hydro (water): 1 percent

        • Oil: 1 percent
       Source: Public Utilities Commission of Ohio

Solitary senior leaves $291,000 for others
Cincinnati early fighter against AIDS
Dismal days dampening summer fun
Twins, mom die in 3-vehicle crash
Girls released in poisoning case
Main Street still feels April riots
Still no decision on Sabin Center
Two men shot in Covington
Another coal plant favored
Canal tunnel gets new life
Protesters break downtown camp
Accident victim dies in hospital
Alcohol will cost students 60 hours
GOP candidate Wiley speaks mind
Kentucky Digest
Local Digest
Middle school considers uniforms
Newport ready for civil unrest
Congrats
Crossing guard retires after 24 years
Foes want road put to vote
Meningitis overshadows graduation
Authorities justify shooting man
Cleveland firm sued over beryllium supplied for A-bombs
Lawyers seek more time for appealing Scott's death case
Patton's suit challenges assembly's review stance
Proposal offers dibs on schools
School Notes
Schools take on job of teaching values, morals
Students boost SUV gas mileage
Suspect arraigned in shooting death