Reply #20: Always 20 years away in the minds of those promoting the Republican energy plan, you mean.

[kristopher]

I'm afraid you need more knowledge on renewables and why they haven't been adopted. With today's technologies, we can replace over 80% of fossil fuels used in this nation within a couple of decades.

The only thing that stops their deployment are anti-competitive practices and policies crafted by the fossil fuel and nuclear power interests. Though their think tanks and media outlets the right wing elites have worked diligently for the past 30 years to introduce a host of false information into the discussion of our power needs. The myth that renewables and batteries need more research is bullshit. Yes, we needed more research on batteries for electric cars; but we could have used solar and lead acid batteries from 20 years ago (since you mention that number) to dramatically reduce the amount of fossil fuels used by the grid.

The only reason solar is expensive is the lack of demand induced by the policies of the fossil fuel interests. Craft policies that guarantee demand and the resulting investment in manufacturing and installation will do what it always does with simple electronic commodities - it will dramatically lower the price.


If you want confirmation that the poor analysis you've put forth here regarding electric cars, renewables and nuclear energy are bad for the public, I'd suggest you check in with the right wing think tanks that supply Hannity and Limbaugh with their talking points. You'll find you are parroting them precisely.

Of course, you might say maybe they have it right on this. I'd reply that they don't. As with every other policy in their book they are focused on perpetuating an existing power structure. Renewable energy and a desire to factor in the costs of environmental impact are their main 'enemies' in this day and age. They don't spend the time and money they do to demonize those areas unless those areas are a real threat.

Why are they a threat if renewables are presently impotent?