Recall early passages from the State of the State address Ted Strickland delivered a year ago. The new governor talked about ''embracing the challenge before us,'' about ''an ambitious vision for our state,'' about ''a revolutionary commitment to new technology.''

''We must be open to new ways of doing things and new ways of thinking,'' he refreshingly declared. He reminded: ''The things that got us here will not get us there.''

All of this served as prelude for the governor reiterating a commitment that he and other Democrats made during the 2006 campaign. The state would pursue aggressively advanced, alternative and renewable energy sources. They would do so, as the governor explained, to ''attract new investments and new jobs.''

''Ohio will embrace new ideas, new industries, new technologies and a new economy,'' Strickland pledged.

Now contrast those words with the recent timidity of the governor.

Companies looking to develop alternative energy sources have explained the need for Ohio to open wide its door to investment. Strickland has set a goal of 25 percent of the energy load coming from advanced and renewable sources by 2025. The companies want something more concrete: in the form of benchmarks, markers of steady progress from year to year.

John Husted listened, even noted that two dozen states have taken such a path. The House speaker proposed a precise ladder upward, the state starting in 2009 with a requirement that renewable sources account for 0.25 percent of the state's energy. Similar incremental steps (including penalties for lack of compliance) would follow in the subsequent years. The governor warmed to the concept, countering the Kettering Republican with a plan to launch benchmarks in 2015.

Strickland framed the delay as necessary to permit renewable energy firms to get established in Ohio. The argument also surfaced that wind turbine suppliers were ''sold out'' and thus poorly positioned to enter the state.

Three wind energy companies set things straight. In recent letters to the governor, Horizon Wind Energy of Houston, Iberdrola Renewables of Spain and Invenergy Wind of Maryland explained that the problem isn't a lack of equipment. They are eager to invest in Ohio. What they want is assurance that a market will exist.

They want benchmarks, along the lines proposed by the speaker. How much would they pump into the state? Bill Whitlock of Horizon Wind Energy pointed to ''over 800 megawatts in our Ohio pipeline, representing an investment of over $1.5 billion.'' Add the efforts of Iberdrola and Invenergy, and the total reaches $2.7 billion.

Worth noting is that the governor champions a proposal to issue $1.7 billion in bonds for such items as public works, biosciences and the Clean Ohio Fund. The sum includes $250 million for alternative and advanced energy sources. Why not welcome enthusiastically a private investment 10 times the size by moving swiftly to put the requested benchmarks in place?

The answer may reside in a struggle for the governor's mind — between Old Ohio and New Ohio.

Large manufacturers are wary of higher prices for electricity due to expanded use of alternative and advanced energy sources. They want to limit increases to 3 percent a year. ''You need a cap, because nobody can predict the future,'' an industry lobbyist told a House committee last month. The governor appears persuaded by the reasoning.

Strickland wants to protect the state's traditional manufacturing base.

What shouldn't be overlooked is that uncertainty is a significant part of doing business. Even the price of coal has increased sharply of late. True, too, is that power companies long have granted favorable prices for manufacturers, and almost surely will continue the practice. More, such limits on price increases will signal to companies looking to develop new sources of energy: Don't come to Ohio.

Too much can be made about the potential of alternative energy, in jobs created and economies transformed. At the same time, advocates highlight the benefits in places such as Iowa, where a former Maytag facility now produces blades for wind turbines. They add that nearly 30 percent of all new electricity generation installed last year in this country involved wind power.

Then, there is the matter of practicality. Projections are that electricity consumption will increase by 40 percent during the next three decades. How to meet the demand? Improved efficiency will be indispensable (and relatively cheap). New coal-fired plants? Additional nuclear power? Alternative energy sources will be essential to overall capacity.

Will Ohio play in a big way?

On Thursday, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that the Strickland team no longer will make available small grants to homeowners seeking to install solar panels or small wind turbines. The state wants to focus on larger deals, on ambitious policies about moving Ohio from where it is to where the state needs to be.

That cannot be achieved without taking a certain risk, without placing a sizable bet on the New Ohio.

Ted Strickland talks about turning around the state, about remaking the university system and repairing the broken formula for school funding. Yet here he is, balking at something as simple as giving wind and other alternative energy developers the assurance they need to set up shop in the state.

Perhaps the governor should spend time revisiting his own compelling words about Ohio making a strategic and distinct break from the past.