Ohio House adjourns for year without giving support to proposed Icebreaker wind farm in Lake Erie 

CLEVELAND, Ohio – The Icebreaker wind energy project proposed for Lake Erie did not get the Republican support advocates were hoping for in Columbus this week.

And it’s unclear what that means for the future of the six-turbine demonstration farm that would be built several miles off Cleveland.

Proponents had hoped the legislature would act by the end of the year.

The project has the necessary regulatory approvals, but not all the money it needs to get started with construction. And unless an additional source of revenue can be identified soon, the project is at risk of losing the federal funding deemed crucial to its success.

Advocates of the project were hoping the legislature would provide support in the form of an amendment to House Bill 389, which had moved out of the Public Utilities Committee, but never came to the floor this week. The House is now adjourned until January.

The bill would restore some of the energy efficiency programs eliminated by House Bill 6. But according to Rep. Kent Smith, a Democrat from Euclid, Republicans were contemplating an amendment that would have authorized a small surcharge on First Energy ratepayers in Northeast Ohio that would have been used to purchase much of the electricity Icebreaker would produce.

Smith said he believes the amendment being discussed would have added no more than $2 a year to a residential electric bill of those served by the Illuminating Co.

As it stands, Cleveland and Cuyahoga County have committed to buying one-third of the 20.7 megawatts of electricity that Icebreaker would generate. A commitment to purchase the remainder would send a signal to the Department of Energy, which has committed $50 million to the project, that the project is moving forward.

Will Friedman, head of the Lake Erie Energy Development Corp., the organization behind Icebreaker, said in October that the Department of Energy had grown weary of the many delays to Icebreaker, planning that began more than a decade ago, and that it wanted to see progress by the end of the year.

Friedman, who is also president and CEO of the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority, declined to speculate about this week’s developments other than to say he is still hopeful Icebreaker can become a reality.

Smith said it’s his understanding that several Republicans are willing to support Icebreaker, including Bill Seitz of the Cincinnati area who is a co-sponsor of House Bill 389, and that he doesn’t know what happened when the issue was discussed within the Republican caucus.

“I think the people who can answer that riddle have an R after their name,” he said.

Cleveland.com has reached out to Seitz for comment, as well as to Rep. Jamie Callender, a Republican from Concord, and Tom Patton, a Republican from Strongsville. Smith said he believes both Callender and Patton support helping fund Icebreaker.

Smith said he’s perplexed as are others that Republicans have been willing to support subsidies for decades-old coal plants, including one in Indiana, but not, at least so far, a clean technology such as Icebreaker that has local Republican support and would create jobs, boost the economy and bring notoriety to Northeast Ohio.

But Smith said that if Friedman is still hopeful that Icebreaker can go forward despite this week’s disappointment that perhaps there is still a chance a supportive amendment can be attached to House Bill 389 if and when it comes up for vote early next year.

Icebreaker would be the first freshwater wind farm in North American if built. While it has the support of the Ohio Environmental Council, a legal challenge by two Bratenahl residents is before the Ohio Supreme Court. They claim more research needs to be done on the potential harm the turbines would have on bats and birds and are asking the Ohio Power Siting Board to withdraw its certificate of approval.