Suppose that Congress gets off it's collective asses and mandates that by the year 2030, 50% of all automobiles sold in the USA must be powered solely by electric means, (batteries). Good or bad idea? I think not so good. Imagine what happens to the electrical grid when 200,000,000 cars are plugged in about 10:00-11:00PM every night to recharge the batteries, in addition to the normal electrical loads. Brown-out come to mind? At 4 per vehicle, 800,000,000 batteries will emit a lot of gasses while charging. Manufacturing the original/replacement batteries is highly polluting. Remember Bopal, India? What to do with the depleted batteries? Recycle, or landfill dump? Where does the electrolyte get disposed of? Current hybrid car batteries are recommended to be replaced every 3-5 years. At around $500-$1,000 each, that ain't cheap. How far can you go at 55 mph on a set of fully charged batteries? NYC to DC and return? Don't think so. Technology will most certainly improve by 2030, but I have my doubts about the feasibility of electric cars. Whatever happens, Congress will fuck it up. IMHO, hydrogen power is a better alternative.

The big problem with the distribution of energy is that it is centralized. This generates revenue for a few already wealthy and powerful individuals, keeps costs high, has a strong, efficient infrastructure at the expense of national security, etc.

The electrical power distribution system (largely powered by coal in the US) and the gasoline distribution system (gamed by speculators and powerful foriegn religious/political interests) are very separate.

Hydrogen is a long way off, and how we generate it for transportable or deliverable energy will probably be very different that how we picture it today.

Hybrids vehicles (and perhaps even home heating, cooling, etc.), even in today's childish stage, are the best compromise for today because they bridge the two - power and fuel - delivery systems, averaging the fluctuations in costs (immediate financial costs, and long-term environmental costs). The 3-5 year figure for battery replacement is wrong - hybrid cars have been around longer than that now, and few batteries have needed replacement.

If every home in the US was outfitted with a solar system that would cost about $15,000 today, we would in-effect return electricity to the grid. Today's solar technology is not very efficient or long-lasting, but it still would allow us to decentralize our power distribution and not rely on the grid. This could allow us to cut coal-based emissions by half, reduce calls for more nuclear energy (relatively clean and safe, but we haven't figured out how to  store its toxic waste), charge more plugin-hybrid batteries, etc.

The people who stand to lose are those currently in power. We complain about the cost of oil yet the majority of us voted an oil man into the White House, twice, and yes we are just that stupid. We complain about the air, yet derive our juice from coal, where only strip mining and heartache can squeeze more coal from the earth.

A change to new technology will generate revenue, and create wealth, for more people than under the current system, but the current system will fight mightily to retain its hold on us.

ALL of the alternative energy sources are a bit far off - even the solar - which others promote.  Solar is relatively inefficient - and won't work in some parts of the country due to overcast days...etc.

Hydrogen?  or do you really mean fuel cell - me?  I'd opt for fuelcell and hydrogen go boom (think Hindenberg)

We are somewhat stuck with fossil fuel for the next 50 or so years - and that means coal, natural gas, and petrol products (kerosine, gasoline, diesel etc.).

I suspect that by then, we will have developed efficient enough solar to be a viable alternative - we may have even figured out how to do fusion - and we will have reached price points that make geothermal, wind and other alternatives economically feasible...

but the real question is what do we do today to make all that happen.

First - you are correct - our corrupt asshole congress has to take the lobbiests out of their collective assses... and that INCLUDES evironmental idiots as well as large corporate interests....

then they need to make energy alternatives a national imperative - how?

Empower the NSF with the type of funding that NIH has - and madate that this be targeted research funding for research on 1) alternative energy sources 2) alternative energy trasportation initiatives 3) economic studies on how better to distribute energy and finally education in science and technology initiatives...  

Second, formation of a program to improve the transportation infrastructure of the top 20 most populated US cities such that private automobiles for transportation within that city is an option - and not a necessity - this would be the modern equivalent of the interstate highway system.

third - formation of development cooperatives - between fuel production and distribution companies, automobile manufacturers, airplane manufacturers and train manufacturers - to produce solutions to how do you power transportation devices without the use of fossel fuels...  as of now, these all operate independant of one another - with few exceptions.

Fourth - educate the public - many are totally ignorant on issues of science and technology.  IGNORANT.

Finally, set REALISTIC goals - many of the insane goals that are set - are set with politicians KNOWING that they are unrealistic.  Why?  Cause it sounds good... not because it will work... and when it fails....  well, it was a greedy corporation - or thoughless john q public who failed to do his / her part - rather than blame the politician who failed to examine the real issues, and the real barriers to achieving the goals... prime example - AL Fucking Gore.

GWB is also a baseball man, and MLB ticket prices have gone through the roof, too, since 2001. And, I believe he owns a ranch, and everyone knows ranch dressing is out of the reach of the average American, at least the top shelf ranch dressing is out of reach.

It's hard to imagine it, but one man (GWB)can raise the world oil price, with the touch of a button? Nod of his head? One phone call to Dr. Evil?

Good news, though. those currently in power are gone in just a few months. So, things could clear up quick. The whole entire world, now paying outrageous prices for oil, will be happy when the devil Bush is gone. Gas will no doubt be down to $1.49 a gallon in the US by 1/21/09 if Obama wins. The Sauds and Iran have vowed to drop the price to 1990 levels if BO wins, right?

you're so dumb. it's economics 101. supply and demand. oil resources are dwindling down. besides, we all know that congress is the one that passes laws (including laws that could bring down the oil prices in the US), then senate approves it(or not), then POTUS can veto it (or not).

you bitch about oil prices. Prices in BC, Canada are around $6/gallon, places in europe are already between $8-$10/gallon. we're not so bad if you compare it with other countries. we're not used to seeing these prices, and that's why a lot of folks are screaming.

prices will just keep going up unless we allow drilling in the OCS to help with the world supply. demand will keep going up, regardless. currently, only 1 out of 70 families in china have cars. what will happen 5-10 yrs from now when that 1 family will rise to the number of 20 or 30?

obama only talks about immediate fixes. there are no immediate fixes. it'll require a combination of immediate, medium, to long term solutions. and mccain has those solutions.

stop denying yourself like obama. wake up!