Bob LaMontagne wrote:
> Alternate energy sources are "alternate" because they are
> not quite ready for prime time.
No, alternative energy sources are alternate because the true cost of
carbon-based fuels has not been truly accounted for.
If you asked the oil and coal industries to also pay for the damage
their products do to the environment and to human health -- and I can
see no reason why any industry and its consumers should *not* pay for
such collateral damage -- not to mention the cost of our military
shoring up their oil access in the middle east, you'd come up with a far
larger figure than gas at $2/gallon. $10/gal? Higher?
> We have an absurdly large supply of ridiculously
> cheap coal (sorry - I'm not swayed by arguments of "true" cost).
While you may not be swayed about arguments of coal's true cost, you pay
for it anyway, via your health and the health of society. Denying them
is absurd. Several posts here have made that clear.