John's Comments

I guess I'll add a third to Kent. No matter what large scale energy projects provide, the best of all plans involves homeowners use of power made on their own property. NO natural disaster can wipe out all the small systems, and surely the advantage of smaller utility bills for the life of the house has to mean something.

First of all comment 7 is correct, Brazil has been doing this for years. As for the everglades, you must not have noticed that Gov. Crist has just used taxpayer dollars to buy out the largest sugar producer in the US. I'm no fan of the Gov. of Florida, but this time his action, even if it gave the Sugar outfit a huge amount of money may have saved the glades. Last I refuse to believe that we will need to burn hydrocarbons in the future. Are we all that stupid to not realize that oil in particular is far more valuable as a petrochemical then fuel. The most efficient trains in the world are the mag-levs, and electric cars and trucks can and will be converted to either electric or hydrogen cracked from water by electricity. The last and only thing that can not be done with TODAYS tech. are the airplanes,. surely in the future either with lighter then airships or more efficient ramjets we will solve that problem too. The thing holding all of these things back is and has been political will. We just should not be burning hydrocarbons[oil]. I personally worked in a coal to gas plant over 30 years ago, which procuced methane[cleaner then nat. gas] at a competative price, but it's still not the way to go. Clean energy can be done now, the longest journey starts with one step, and if we don't start now it won't matter. So is it a good thing that we have people smart enough to make gas from crop waste, yes, but at what cost? Don't even get me started on nukes, as anything started in that area wouldn't make power for at least ten years. Solar and wind can put in place now and as each new piece comes on line in months not years, it will relieve the energy crisis we face now. Further building and maintaining these plants will provide many jobs and allow us to have a better world to live in. Without the crushing cost of energy in that future, we can get on with the business of productive lives.

Right off the bat in comment #1, you think 300 million to decommission a nuke plant. You obviously don't live on Long Island, ! billion and counting for Shoreham, that never made a Kw of power. I've worked in 3 nukes since1962 and was a supporter. As I've learned more, I have given up hope that nukes would ever be viable. The sad part is that the solutions have been out there for a long time. Conservation, renewables, and common sense can get us through this, if the pols. don't give all our money away to the moneychangers on Wall St.

I don't understand the negativity here. We all bitch about the politicians doing nothing, then they try and most of the commentators rip them. Do we need to get everything we want? That is not the way it works in a "free" country. This is not even political, we need something now! At least the Dems. are trying to undo the giveaways to the oil industry, as if Exxon needed our tax money, and all the while they are not even paying royalties!!! Get your heads out of the sand and get busy electing people who support clean industry. Ask questions,get involved. As a retired electrician, I've been fighting since the sixtys for renewable power. Don't tell me the old saw about where are we going to store the power, it can be done, it could have been done 40 years ago. Read, study, watch c-span and see what they do and who are our friends, then get busy replacing the toads and thieves. You are smart people here, you should be able to figure out who the good guys and girls are. E-mail them, go to meetings, this is too simple a problem to go unsolved, we went to the moon for crying out loud.

I really like the idea of heat pumps, however I can't figure out why real geo-thermal heat from a source such as is found in Yellowstone Park is not considered, ala Iceland. That heat would come up very hot from a short distance down and could be used in many ways. My only objection to such a system is that it would still leave the production to a large entity that would have to make a profit. I favor individually owned power on every roof. No taxes to collect, no profit to be made for shareholders. Eveything an individal can do to lesson dependency on the grid is the way to go.

I remain unimpressed with new govt. proclamations of support for renewable energy plans. It should have been an ongoing priority since Jimmie Carter. Why is there not an effort to use this standard, when rebuilding New Orleans? I've seen many things come and go, but this is no game anymore. The federal govt. can lead the way on all these things, and hopefully they will.

This all sounds great, but what do you do with the power made from the cars engine? Not being a chemist or scientist I don't really know,but these substances sound very much like what is being talked about for solar cells themselves. The idea of trapping the heat at the solar panel sounds really good to me. I for one am really glad to see American scientist responding to the energy crisis, we do live in interesting times.

There ae many answers to the problem,from the most radical[ nationalize the power companys] to just being more efficient. Whatever might be said about Pres. Carter, make no mistake, if we had followed his lead we would be better off by far then we are. As for tax incentives, what is wrong with grants to homeowners for solar or thermal panels, to be paid back by the difference in their utility bills. When the grant is paid back to the Govt. then the homeowner would receive the full benifit of their renewable system. I know if we could go to the moon , we can solve this problem, if we do not allow the oil lobbies and their companies and other vultures get their hands on the market. This is the challange, not the tech aspects of it. Ours people are the best inovators in the world, it's the special interests that hold us back.

I think it is sad that a great technical site like this , has been invaded by naysayers and trolls for the oil and coal industrys. Some of the negative comments seem to have been picked right from industry web sites. People here have always talked about possibilities and since Mr. Gore has been 'into' this for thirty years or so, I would think he would get more respect. Some of the comments are just hideous, and seem to lack knowledgeable thinking. All the traditional energy sources, have been for many years been subsidized, and still are[ 8 billion to oil cos.] Clean coal should be developed, not so much for here, but to sell to China. Oil should be saved any way possible, for a futyre that makes will find better ways to use it then to burn it. Nukes supporters never want to count the costs of taking a plant out of commission after it's useful life. There are costs to everythng, but if you don't realize that we must start now, then you have been sleeping at the wheel. There's more at stake here then economics, even if you are a person that will not agree with the global climate change theory, you have to see that this is a turning point for America. should we try to charge into the future,or are we to become a sleepy nation of Luddites? I say it is better to try, since the things that develope as sidebars to the new way of energy production, could be more valuable then the energy itself.

I have one small comment for Richard of comment 7. You forgot Jimmy Carter, who was really on top the situation,deployed solar panels on the White House roof, only to haveR Ragen remove them. So, who was the smarter man in retrospect?

I agree with comment #4, however that puts me in conflict with comment#6. Thje auther of comment #6 has obviously lost his mind, except insofar as all he wants to do is promote a politician instead of us working people. Keep drinking the kool-aid Brian, some of us are smart enough to know what you are up to.

As much as I admire all this wind turbine work,I still think that the best way for the average middle class citizen of the US to survive and prosper is to have an energy source on every roof. All this big tech still leaves us at the mercy of investers who will then gouge us just as the oil companys do now. Excuse my cynical heart.

I think that we here know that as expensive as pv is, it still is a good investment over the long houl. Try as you will however, you will have a hard time selling that to someone that can't afford to put fuel in their car. The real answer is political will in DC to save the middle class instead of the invester class.

Why anyone in their right mind would listen to Newt Gingrich is beyond me. I'm a retired electrician with a pv installer certificate, and can't get anyone to listen. Newt and his crony's have led us down a path that leaves working class peoplewith no way to pay for these systems, even with subsidies. The only conclusion is that the Corporations have controll and are not going to give it up easily. I worry about these things not for myself, but for all the children who will be paying for this in the future. The only answer is to try to elect officials who will promiseto promote these things and if they don't elect someone else. Our representatives are elected every 2 years, get to work people. As for Mr. Erickson, please crawl back in your hole, some of us have seen the changes and climate change is no joke..

So Paul, you seem to imply that getting rid of well trained experience4d workers is the answer. The american people have subsidised some of our largest industrys, and saved Crysler from bankruptcy, while handing out large payouts to CEO's and laying off workers. The union workers at the plant didn't tell GM to stop making the GEO metro[55mpg] or the electric car.. O but I forgot, them thieving union workers, it's all their fault.It's time you supply siders and anti union believers, take off the blinders. Unless you are sitting on some number of millions,you proclaim policy that is against your own interest Please explain how 8% of the work force can cause all this trouble?