Their efforts are the latest in a line of complaints from small energy companies and conservation groups across the country.

The most controversial aspect of the bill is the pricing and availability of carbon offsets.

As proposed in the bill, companies which rely on the burning of fossil-fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) would have a cap placed on the amount of carbon dioxide emissions allowed. This cap would gradually lower the amount of emissions.

Companies would then have to capture carbon dioxide – which current technology does not support – or buy allowances, either from other companies or from entities like the government.

“A better description of the HR 2454 is ‘cap and tax’. At direct expense to consumers in increased prices paid for electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuels, dollars will flow to Washington DC,” said Brian Barger of Mid Ohio Energy.

A concern of Mid Ohio, and the bi-partisan National Committee on Energy Policy, is the lack of a price ceiling for offsets.

Companies who don’t use their allotted allowances can sell them to other companies who are over their allowances. While the bill calls for a minimum price, no maximum is included.

This could lead to price gouging or, as the National Committee fears, fraud which would drive up the price for energy traders and speculators.

Both groups, as well as several conservation groups across the country, are most worried about the international offsets in which countries can get higher allowances by investing resources in conservation activities abroad, where lower wages and overhead would save companies money while taking jobs away from American workers.

“It (HR 2454) requires lower emissions without technology available to do so and it guarantees disproportionately higher energy costs for Ohio’s consumers and industry with no assurance that carbon emission levels will in fact be lowered,” Barger concluded.