Supporters claim House Bill 6 incentivizes clean energy development, but at the end of the day, a new pot of money created by tacking assessments on to the monthly power bills of all Ohioans will be used to bail out FirstEnergy’s bankrupt nuclear power plants.

The aging Davis-Besse plant near Toledo and the Perry plant in Lake County, owned by FirstEnergy Solutions, have repeatedly sought state financial support. Ohio lawmakers denied that cry for help two years ago, allowing a bailout bill to die then.

The issue has been re-introduced this time under new House Speaker Larry Householder, who has put House Bill 6 on a fast track, largely because FirstEnergy says it needs to know soon whether to produce nuclear fuel to operate beyond the plants’ scheduled closing dates.

The bill purports to be an impartial boost to cleaner energy because it would reward utilities of any sort for zero-emissions energy. If passed, a surcharge will be added to Ohioans’ electric bills ranging from about $2.50 per month for residential customers to $2,500 for major industrial users, specifically dedicated to creating and funding the “Ohio Clean Air Program.” It would create a pot of about $300 million per year to help fund new energy production. The program would pay utilities $9.25 for every megawatt hour of energy produced with zero carbon emissions.

Wind and solar energy exist on a small scale in Ohio, meaning the two nuclear plants account for the vast majority of zero carbon power in the state. That also means the two nuclear plants would claim about half of the $300 million the new monthly fees would generate.

The plan also would get rid of renewable energy mandates that add on extra charges, something supporters say would reduce energy bills in the long run. Supporters of wind and solar energy say the move would be a major blow to renewable energy growth.

Without financial help, FirstEnergy says Perry and Davis-Besse nuclear plants will close by 2021, triggering a loss of jobs and tax base — but only in the Lake Erie communities where the plants are located, and not in other areas of the state like Trumbull County or the Mahoning Valley. During recent testimony in Columbus, State Rep. Michael O’Brien, D-Warren, asked whether there was any guarantee that First Energy Solutions would keep all its jobs in Ohio if lawmakers allow the surcharges.

The answer? There is not.

Now, to be clear, we don’t argue against the benefits of nuclear energy. Diversity in energy production is key. We understand the integral role nuclear power plays in Ohio’s electric generation portfolio.

While we realize the huge economic value of the soon-to-be two new natural gas-fueled Clean Energy Future power plants in Lordstown, we still don’t believe putting all our eggs into one basket is ever a good idea.

We know that keeping Ohio’s two nuclear plants operating will help preserve nuclear power as an option for Ohio’s future if the technology becomes cheaper and the problem of nuclear waste storage ever is resolved.

We get all that.

But where we disagree is relying on all Ohioans to swallow the bailout.

New York and Illinois have responded to nuclear energy producers’ demands by giving out billion-dollar bailouts that will be paid by ratepayers to stop unprofitable nuclear plants from closing prematurely.

But similar proposals have met with resistance in Pennsylvania, Connecticut and New Jersey — as well as in Ohio until now — because such subsidies would cause utility bills to increase.

As Bill Siderewicz, head of Clean Energy Future, put it recently: Subsidizing the nuclear plants negatively affects the free market and could cause potential investors in the planned Trumbull Energy Center natural gas-fired Lordstown power plant to pull back their financial support.

Last week, O’Brien said the prevailing issue is that the two nuclear power plants are bankrupt and they need hundreds of millions of dollars to stay open. O’Brien believes if the nuclear plants were to close, enough power still would exist from other sources like natural gas- and coal-fired plants and, to a lesser degree, wind and solar to fill the gap.

Ohioans should not be required to bear the financial burden of bailing out FirstEnergy’s aging and expensive nuclear power plants.