If the future of energy in North Dakota is green and powered by renewable energy, the present is fossil fuels. Climate legislation pending in Washington aims at reducing carbon emissions, but state energy utilities are telling Washington they need more time to develop new technology.

"Like a lot of other cooperatives in the country, our bedrock is coal. That's what we have here," said Ron Harper, chief executive officer of Basin Electric Cooperative, during the group's annual meeting in Bismarck last week. Like other energy utilities, Basin is concerned about the impact of two pieces of legislation moving through the United States House and Senate aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions and is working to bring those concerns to Washington.

Basin has created a list of 13 provisions it believes should be part of climate legislation, covering issues including funding for emission reduction technology, the timeline for the implementation of an emissions cap, a market for trading emissions allowances, credit for actions already taken and other components of the complicated legislation. However, the main concerns center on time and money.

The estimate by the MDU Resources Group on the money question is an 11 percent increase for customers by 2012, if the House version of the proposed legislation becomes law. Harper said the legislation could add up to $497 million per year for Basin Electric by 2012.

The time part involves allowing more time for utilities and energy producers to develop the means to reduce carbon emissions - which scientists have linked to climate change and global warming - by developing greener or more efficient energy production.

"Our view is that a lot of the bill is focused on coal plants and getting rid of coal," said Rick Matteson, communications director for MDU. "You can't replace that in the near future, let alone overnight."

The fact North Dakota's energy industry is heavily tied to coal, one of the more polluting energy sources, means that utilities here would bear the burden of legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions. Under the "cap-and-trade" model being considered in Congress, carbon emitters would have to buy allowances for emissions above a certain cap, while cleaner companies would be able to sell carbon credits on a market.

"A lot of the industry built in North Dakota was built when federal policy said coal was the fuel of choice," said Dennis Hill, executive vice president and general manager of the North Dakota Association of Rural Electric Cooperatives. "You can't just shut that down in a short period of time." A more realistic time period would be decades, he said.

The coal industry has been trying strategies to capture carbon before it enters the atmosphere and to make energy generation more efficient. Basin Electric recently won a $100 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy to develop carbon capture at its Antelope Valley station near Beulah, an example of an incentive to encourage cleaner energy, though still only a quarter of the cost of the project, Harper said.

"The lignite industry has not been sitting on its hands" and has been working to improve efficiency and emissions, said Steve Van Dyke, communications director for the Lignite Energy Council. "The timeline for reducing emissions have to be in line with when technology is available."

NDAREC, along with other energy groups, has a line to Washington through the national cooperative association, which has stated that it does not support the current legislation. MDU has a lobbyist on staff to work for its interests and belongs to various national and regional groups. The three members of the North Dakota Democratic congressional delegation have been working with energy generators and distributors and were all scheduled to appear at Basin Electric's meeting Thursday. Rep. Earl Pomeroy, voted against the House bill, and Sens. Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan have said they would not support a Senate bill similar to what the House passed earlier this year.

When and in what form climate legislation could emerge from Congress is difficult to predict, and it could be after 2010's mid-terms, when politicians will not have to face the problem of supporting a potentially unpopular bill during an election. However, tighter emissions regulation is something that the energy industry will have to face soon.

Dean Hulse, a past chairman of the Dakota Resource Council, an environmental group supporting the climate legislation, said reducing energy consumption through energy efficiency and conservation should be part of an emission reduction strategy along with developing new technology.

"What's the minimal amount of energy we need as a country?" is a question that should be part of the discussion, Hulse said. Current chairwoman Marie Hoff said wind power and improved transmission of wind power should be considered as serious alternatives, which are already moving forward.

"We're on the way, I think, as a state," Hoff said.

For now, fossil fuels will remain the resource of choice, with coal playing a central role in power generation and the state economy.

"Have you ever thought about what North Dakota would be like without a billion dollars of revenue from the mining of coal?" Harper said. "I think it's going to take all forms of energy as we move forward."

(Reach reporter Christopher Bjorke at 250-8261 or chris.bjorke@bismarcktribune.com.)