Ohio House Bill 170: Carbon Capture
Claire Witalec is a Sophomore at Laurel School in Ohio.
As climate change rapidly destroys the environment around us, Ohio is no exception. Indeed, the Climate Policy Dashboard found that “Ohio ranks 7th in the country for natural gas production and 10th for crude oil production, and in-state electricity generation is overwhelmingly sourced from fossil fuels.” Emissions are certainly impacting Ohio’s population, so what is the Ohio statehouse doing to combat the increase? On Oct. 8, Ohio House Bill 170 passed in the Ohio House of Representatives, and it will now head on to voting in the Senate.
What is Ohio House Bill 170?
Ohio House Bill 170 would likely increase companies’ ability to pump carbon dioxide excess, presumably from hydrogen production or industrial complexes, underground, in an aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Right now, “companies seeking to build these projects must go through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for permits, a process that can take years and discourage investment.” Nonetheless, if this bill is passed, these powers would be handed from the federal government to the state government, potentially speeding up this process.
What are the potential consequences?
While carbon capture may seem like a perfect solution to the pressing environmental problems in Ohio, allowing these carbon capture processes slows the shift from fossil fuel reliance to clean renewable energy sources, because fossil fuels can continue to be utilized without exceeding emissions. Many believe that carbon capture processes are just a veil to justify the continuation of fossil fuel dependence.
Moreover, air capture technologies need energy to operate, such as to compress the carbon. Nancy Stauffer with the MIT Energy Initiative reported that “using coal-based electricity to drive an all-electric DAC process would generate 1.2 tonnes of CO2 for each tonne of CO2 captured.” Carbon capture may not be the solution, and, in fact, could increase the problem.
Additionally, this bill could have profound impacts on Ohio residents. Peggy Kirk Hall, the attorney and director for the Agricultural and Resource Program at Ohio State, explains that “the new law would affect agricultural landowners, who could be asked to lease their ‘pore space,’’’ which is space underground that is not filled with solid material. These small empty spaces are where the carbon from carbon capture processes would be stored.
However, landowners may not even be asked for their permission to use their land for carbon capture. Bev Reed with the Buckeye Environmental Network furthers that a provision of the bill actually “allows CO2 storage projects to advance without the approval of all affected landowners.” In a legislative hearing on the bill, testimonies expressed concern over the large tracts of land the bill could take and the potential risks to humans and the environment alike. An article from the Ohio River Valley Institute by Tim Torres crystallizes that “this legislation disenfranchises other stakeholders, including people who object to CO2 storage under their properties and homes, and exposes the public to novel safety risks” such as pipeline ruptures and well-head blowouts.
Photo courtesy of Pixabay.com.
Who drives the passage of this legislation?
The government is designed to serve the people, but in reality, oftentimes lobbyists are the main drivers of the passage of the legislation. For example, an article from the Ohio Capital Journal, by Kathiann Kowalski, a reporter with Canary Media, concluded that “[i]ndustry lobbyists often play an active role in pushing for legislation that will favor them.” However, the article continues by explaining that “the American Petroleum Institute and the Ohio Oil and Gas Association have played an outsize role in shaping [Ohio House Bill 170].”
What's next?
While Ohio’s climate policy is far from perfect, there have been improvements. In fact, the Climate Policy Dashboard even corroborates that “Ohio’s emissions decreased 22% from 2005-2022.” But with this controversial legislation passing through the statehouse, how can Ohio continue to make progress in reducing emissions?
Well, there are also many nonprofits and initiatives designed to advocate for climate policy reform for the better. For example, the Ohio Environmental Council aims to “protect the environment and health of all Ohio communities through legal and policy advocacy, decision-maker accountability, and civic engagement.” Organizations like this one can work to advocate against the disregard of climate issues in the state government.
Furthermore, constituent voices are crucially important. Stephanie Howse Jones, a Cleveland City Club Council Member and former Ohio Statehouse Representative, stated that “Ohioans must demand more of their state legislature.” By this, she does not just mean voting; instead, she is referring to organizing constituents and directly interacting with officials in order to advocate for positive environmental changes at the state level. Participation by citizens in Ohio politics is crucial to making sure the government is well aware of constituent concerns.
The 89% Project, an international initiative aiming to illustrate the scope of the consensus on climate change, determined that “[b]etween 80 and 89% of the world’s people want their governments to be doing more to address climate change.” With such a large population desiring more action on climate change, it’s imperative that Ohio residents get involved with legislation, such as Ohio House Bill 170, and share their views on whether or not carbon capture is a clean solution.
Ohio House Bill 170: Carbon Capture © 2025 by Youth Environmental Press Team is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
