RALEIGH - Weeks of negotiation have gone into a bill to set a requirement for renewable fuel and energy efficiency use by North Carolina's utility companies, but that doesn't mean everyone likes it.

A Senate committee unveiled a proposed revision of the bill Thursday that calls for a higher renewable-efficiency standard than originally sought, but also a disputed plan to pass to consumers in advance the costs of building new power plants.

"I just don't know why we need to run those provisions in a renewable energy bill that's about weaning us off fossil fuels and stimulating a green energy economy," said Rep. Pricey Harrison, D-Guilford, sponsor of a similar House bill that lacks the financing provisions. "It's dragging us back to new coal plants, making it easier to build new coal [plants]."

The changes received no vote as Sen. Charlie Albertson, D-Duplin -- the Senate bill's sponsor and chairman of the Senate Agriculture, Environment and Natural Resources Committee -- gave members until next Tuesday's meeting to absorb the complicated elements.

The revision is the fruit of more than a dozen meetings among power companies, environmental groups, consumer advocates and other stakeholders, some of whom had a chance Thursday to express their satisfaction -- or lack of -- with the result.

All praised an increase to 12.5 percent in the renewable energy-energy efficiency portfolio standard -- the amount of retail power that utilities would be obliged to supply from renewable sources or efficiency by 2021.

The amount splits the difference in Albertson's original bill, which set a 10 percent standard, and the 15 percent standard in Harrison's measure.

"Although it does have its shortcomings, it provides a clear path to let North Carolina take advantage of the abundant renewable energy sources and enable the economy as a whole to use energy more efficiently," said Kris Coracini, a spokeswoman for Environmental Defense.

Other environmental groups were more adamant in their opposition to the provision for baseload financing, or a process by which utility companies can charge ratepayers to help pay for coal-fired, nuclear and other power plants that have yet to be constructed.

Elizabeth Ouzts, director of Environment North Carolina, said her organization and several others will oppose the bill so long as it includes the baseload financing provision.

"Given the significant societal costs of coal and nuclear power, namely global warming and air pollution as well as hazardous waste," she said, "we believe it is critical that the state maximize its potential for renewable energy and energy efficiency before tipping the scales further toward new coal and nuclear power plants."

An attorney for the Public Staff, the consumer advocacy arm of the North Carolina Utilities Commission, raised concern over a separate section that addresses how utilities would spread the cost of fuel among their ratepayers.

Toni Wike said that, while the Public Staff doesn't oppose the bill, it would like to see a change in the proposed formula to place less of a burden on residential ratepayers rather than industrial and commercial power customers.

Committee counsel George Givens said several sections that remain under debate may be resolved by Tuesday's meeting.

Get $150+ in coupons in every Sunday N&O. Click here for convenient home delivery.