WASHINGTON - The August uproar over health-care reform almost muted public discourse over global warming, a climate phenomenon that holds serious implications for Wisconsin and the rest of the nation.

But the health-care din hasn't quelled the fight among supporters and opponents of a House bill dealing with energy and climate change as combatants anticipate consideration of a similar proposal in the Senate soon after lawmakers return from their summer break.

The central goal of the House bill is a 17-percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, based on 2005 levels. Scientists say those emissions - carbon dioxide is the most prevalent - are warming the Earth and, if unchecked, could lead to catastrophic environmental consequences.

To reach its goal, the House bill would establish a cap-and-trade system in which polluters could buy credits from nonpolluters. The House bill also would require large utilities to generate 15 percent of their electricity through renewable fuels.

In recent weeks, the oil lobby and a manufacturers trade group ignited a campaign in the Mountain West and Midwest asserting that the House legislation would be a job killer.

Environmental and labor groups have countered with a "Made in America" tour to highlight the green jobs they say would be created.

While cap-and-trade has been the major point of contention, environmentalists and some energy industry groups are pushing for a Senate bill that would have a stronger renewable-electricity standard than what has been discussed.

In an Aug. 28 letter, several Wisconsin environmental groups urged Democratic Sens. Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl to support legislation that would require utility companies to generate 25 percent of their power from renewable resources, such as biomass, geothermal, solar and wind, by 2025.

"While we greatly appreciate the work of the House, it is critical that the U.S. Senate pass a bill that will better help Wisconsin transition to a clean energy economy and create jobs," the letter said.

Kohl said in a statement that lawmakers must be careful to ensure that a new energy policy doesn't have an adverse economic impact.

"Climate change is a serious problem that needs action before it permanently changes our environment for the worse," Kohl said. "However, we need to be cautious going forward and make sure the bill does not unfairly hurt Wisconsin's economy."

Feingold issued a similar statement.

"I want to ensure cap-and-trade legislation wouldn't unfairly impact Wisconsin and will achieve its goal of addressing climate change," he said. "If we do this right, we have an opportunity to pass climate change and energy legislation that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, create jobs here in America and help American businesses gain a competitive advantage developing new renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies."

Dan Kohler, director of Wisconsin Environment, one of the groups that signed the letter, said a new federal energy policy with a strong renewable-electricity standard would bolster efforts already under way in Wisconsin to grow a clean-energy economy.

"As we make that transition, there are abundant opportunities here that are actually pretty profound," Kohler said.

Kohler cited the Sept. 1 opening of a Cardinal Solar Technologies plant in Mazomanie and Energy Composite Corp.'s planned wind turbine blade factory in Wisconsin Rapids as examples of the job-creating potential that a climate-energy bill would offer.

But opponents say any climate bill that includes a cap-and-trade carbon emissions system could do more harm than good.

In Wisconsin, for example, the House bill would cost 41,600 to 56,700 jobs by 2030, according to a recent study by the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Council for Capital Formation. The measure would cause an increase in electricity and gas prices and reduce Wisconsin's disposable household income by $134 to $264 a year by 2020 and by $881 to $1,432 by 2030, the study said.

"At a time when our country is struggling to come out of our longest and deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression, lawmakers should be focused on policies that provide incentives for businesses so they can create jobs and grow," said Jay Timmons, executive vice president of NAM.

After a forum last week in Saginaw, Mich., on clean energy and the economy, Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle told reporters that similar assertions were made several years ago when Congress was considering clean-air legislation. The predicted job losses never materialized, he said.

Doyle said he, too, initially had concerns about the cap-and-trade provision. But, he added, the House bill has undergone "some major adjustments for industrial states like Wisconsin. In the end, Wisconsin is going to do much better as we move toward a green economy."

Because of its reliance on electricity from coal plants, the Midwest is particularly carbon-intensive.

Carbon emissions in Wisconsin increased by 25 percent between 1990 and 2004, making the state the world's 38th-largest polluter, ahead of such countries as Austria, Israel, Romania and Sweden, according to a 2007 study by Wisconsin Environment.

In a report released in June, the group noted that clean-energy efforts in Wisconsin annually prevent 4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, more than 10 million pounds of nitrogen oxide, 15 million pounds of sulfur dioxide and 80 pounds of highly toxic mercury from entering the atmosphere.

Kohler said a new federal energy policy would further clear the air in Wisconsin and ease the state's transition to a green economy.

"The reality is the status quo is unacceptable," he said. "If we act now ... Wisconsin can position ourselves to be a leader in this new clean-air economy."