Mitt Romney perverts concept of a level playing field in energy. Not by accident

String of 2.5-megawatt wind turbines along a ridge on the Kumayaay Indian Reservation in California. Mitt Romney's views on the federal production tax credit for wind power'he thinks it should be ended'clash with views of people across the spectrum in the swing state of Iowa, including Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley. His views on the credit also clash with some of his own energy advisers although he is lockstep with them on just about everything else related to energy. Even though his energy advisory team is dominated by leftovers from the Bush administration, lobbyists for the fossil-fuel industry or men who have been made unspeakably wealthy by fossil fuel, some of them do not go so far as to reject green energy out of hand.

Romney's views in this matter also clash with common sense. For those who want to know, I'll get to the details in a minute. But for now, the important thing about the production tax credit is that it works. However, for months now, it's been in limbo. It sunsets on Dec. 31. This has happened three times previously. Each time the credit is revived. But each hiatus causes havoc within the industry and its suppliers. That's what we're beginning to see again. Since wind farms typically take 18 months to complete from the time a permit is received until the turbines are up and spinning, investors already are shying away from new projects because of the iffy nature of the credit's future. Fewer investors means fewer wind farms, fewer technological innovations, fewer jobs and more dependence on the fuels that nature is informing us every day we must stop burning.

There was, finally, one bit of good news last week. The Senate Finance Committee managed to stick a one-year extension on the production tax credit in legislation it sent to the whole Senate. But while that item may pass the upper chamber, in the House a determined, climate-change-denying crew of know-nothings and fossil-fuel fans will do what they can to scuttle it. And they'll have Mitt Romney on their side.

He spoke against the production tax credit while he was in Iowa last week. But this isn't the first time he's expressed opposition. This time, after he did, Obama campaign spokesman Adam Fetcher had this to say:

By opposing an extension to the wind production tax credit, Mitt Romney has come out against growth of the wind industry to support 100,000 jobs by 2016 and 500,000 jobs by 2030. Meanwhile, he supports $4 billion in oil and gas subsidies for companies that have rarely been more profitable.

Half a million jobs down the chute. No big deal to the Bain buccaneer. For a guy who likes to fire people, this would be the cherry topper.

Too bad the Obama campaign must maintain a sense of decorum. It would be good to hear Fetcher or others just say flat out what this stance on energy means. Either: 1) Romney is a numbskull; or 2) Romney is up to his eyebrows with his fossil fuel buddies and will kill jobs and continue wrecking the planet just so they all, and he, can profit.

There is a good reason Iowans love wind power. Their state not only gets 19 percent of its electricity from wind turbines, the second highest percentage in the nation, but the wind industry also provides as many as 7,000 jobs in the state. Some 85 percent of Iowans think wind power is beneficial, according to a poll commissioned by the American Wind Energy Association, an industry group. Even 41 percent of Iowa Republicans told pollsters they are less likely to support a presidential candidate who doesn't favor expanding wind power.  

Iowa isn't the only state getting a high proportion of its electricity from the wind. South Dakota is first, with 22 percent. North Dakota, Minnesota and Wyoming all get at least 10 percent of theirs that way. All told, wind has an installed generating capacity of 49 gigawatts in the U.S., about 4.3 percent of the nation's total. Wind generated slightly more than 3 percent of total U.S. electricity in the United States during the 12-month period ending in May this year.

That may not seem like much. But a decade ago, it was one-tenth that. Phenomenal growth.

(Continue reading below the fold.)