State Rep. Sara Innamorato presents a very narrow and inaccurate view in her Feb. 13 op-ed “Risk vs. Profits,” opposing Pennsylvania’s energy economy.

Start with her take on House Bill 1100. Simply put: a tax incentive is money not collected, or money spent. The bill provides performance-based tax incentives triggered by actual expenditures of a minimum $450 million in a new petrochemical plant. It merely provides an incentive for a company to come to our state — something every state does to try to attract or retain companies.

Approved overwhelmingly by both parties in the House, this is not irrational generosity. These plants will employ thousands of construction workers and spur thousands of additional jobs as union-scale wages and benefits enter the local economy.

Ms. Innamorato calls these incentives, “money that could have sustained many more families currently struggling to make ends meet in our communities.”

Wrong. The tax dollars we don’t collect aren’t dollars we can spend elsewhere. It’s a zero-sum game. There is, however, money lost in jobs that won’t be created, taxes not collected and business lost up and down the economy.

As for environmental science, she invokes scare language while ignoring the fact that the switch from coal to natural gas by power plants in Pennsylvania has resulted in a 36% reduction in CO2 emissions since 2010. And natural gas use is not fading, but rather growing for reasons that are far more expansive than providing power.

We believe that we can grow our diverse economy offering true opportunities for everyone while developing and implementing proven technologies to provide continuing environmental improvement.

Complex issues require complex and cooperative solutions. This is where we need to spend our efforts, not on hyperbole and “shock value” headline-grabbing statements.

JEFF NOBERS
Executive Director
Builders Guild of Western Pennsylvania
Green Tree

First Published: February 20, 2020, 5:00 a.m.