A Harvard University study strongly endorses Canadian electricity imports as a cheap alternative to Mideast oil and rejects a proposal from the domestic coal industry to limit the hydroelectric power. The report, released Monday by the Energy and Environmental Policy Center at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government, dismisses arguments that Canadian producers have unfair advantages over domestic utilities. It also dismisses assertions that reliance on Canadian imports could leave the United States vulnerable, and that government subsidies and lower environmental standards make the exports possible. Instead, it says, Canadian utilities can export hydroelectric power at a cheaper price than it costs to build new coal facilities because of Canada's vast water resources. ``Arguments about Canadian subsidies, lax environmental standards and national security implications are not only often factually wrong, but also divert attention from the real public policy issue,'' said Henry Lee, executive director of the center and co-author of the study. ``If Canada has greater access to inexpensive natural resources, should the U.S. federal government limit the ability of U.S. consumers to purchase those resources?'' Lee asked. The Harvard researchers estimated that the 35,300 gigawatt hours of Canadian electricity purchased by the United States in 1986 would increase by 1995 to between 52,000 and 63,000 gigawatt hours. A gigawatt is a billion watts. Canadian power imports represent only 2 percent of U.S. consumption nationwide, but they account for about 10 percent of the electricity used in New England and New York. The $75,000 study was paid in large part by utilities that benefit from Canadian imports. Lee said buying large chunks of Canadian power does not pose a national security risk since it is unlikely Canada would cut off electricity for political reasons. ``The security costs of any practically attainable level of Canadian imports are far outweighed by the national security benefits which accrue to the United States from reducing oil imports'' from Mideast nations, the report said. Rep. Nick Joe Rahall II, D-W.Va., countered, ``Political relationships are volatile with changes in leadership, and in no way can we use today's stable relationship (with Canada) as a basis for the future.'' Rahall, chairman of the House Interior subcommittee on mining and natural resources, introduced legislation last year that would prohibit Canadian power imports unless they adhered to environmental safeguards similar to those in the United States. The study also said that Canadian imports displace mostly imported oil and domestic natural gas, not coal. If all Canadian power contracts were cancelled, the coal industry would see a 2,479 increase in jobs, but it would cost U.S. consumers $114,123 per job, the study said.