Most political/environmental prescriptions still have that underlying "free" market Reagan revolution flaw at their heart.

Cap and trade, offsets, auctioned GHG permits, they all have that illusionary market efficiency, let-big-business-do-it attitude.

The false premise behind these schemes is obvious, that unregulated markets are onmiscient saviours of the human species.  Kind of like Jesus, but with money?

Government directed WW 2 war production, competition survived and capitalism thrived, so what is the problem with a million car per year government contract with the automakers?

They want a bailout, the country needs a gradual reduction of oil use.  In WW 2 we needed jeeps, trucks, planes, tanks, bombs...

We need plugin hybrids, solar cogeneration panels, ground source heating/cooling systems, biogas power plants, smart grid devices...this time.

Free markets?  The automakers still get to compete on price, quality, and appearance of the cars.  But the plugin hybrid powerplant should be part of the contract.  Specific performance standards, like those required for the jeep, during WW 2.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

From wikipedia:

"..the Army's tender was quite demanding. Company's bids were to be received by July 22 (just eleven days later). They were given 49 days to submit their first prototype, and 75 days for completion of 70 required test vehicles. The Army's Ordnance Technical Committee specifications were equally demanding: the vehicle would be four-wheel drive, have a crew of three, on a wheelbase of no more than 75 (later 80) inches and tracks no more than 47 inches, a fold-down windshield, 660 lb payload and be powered by an engine capable of 85 ft·lbf (115 N·m) of torque. The most daunting demand however was an empty weight of no more than 1300 lb (590 kg)."

This was a spectacularly successfull government/industry collaboration.  So why not specify a plugin hybrid power plant?  Government intervention in "free" markets?

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

The State is and always will be the primordial force setting the rules within which capitalism is allowed to function.

In the 19th century, the People and the State decided that capitalists can no longer use 10 year old kids as slaves in their mills. And the capitalist obeyed. He then began to innovate, to make sure he remained productive by only exploiting adult slaves. Later there were even capitalists courageous enough to act proactively, and abandon crazy modes of production. They innovated, set new rules themselves, and prospered, because they were first and everyone else had to follow.

The People and the State now decide that capitalists can no longer destroy the planet and the conditions that allow life to thrive on it (such as the right atmosphere). The capitalist will work within these rules.

As always, some capitalists (like Google, to name just one), act proactively and set the rules for everyone else. They see opportunity in the green economy. And everyone else will follow.

The problem is that some capitalists and their 'think tanks' are a tad idiotic, and keep promoting the bankrupt past. They will be forgotten by history. Just like the loonies who kept defending child labor in the 19th century are forgotten too.

The People and the State remain the primordial force determining the rules within which economic systems are allowed to function. That will not change, no matter how the capitalist tries to change the mindset of the People (and eventually even that of the State).

As Reason progresses, the People keep setting ever more Rational rules. Irrational capitalists cannot stop this process, for it is a force of historic necessity.

Underestimating the enemy is often a cause of defeat.  Right wingers are not stupid, they are morally bankrupt and spiritually vacuous.  Intellectually they can be as smart as anyone.  Nixon was brilliant, so is Cheney.  The problem is that they're evil.

Jabailo, I don't agree with your idea that Romm uses name calling. Common, read his text, it's very well researched and argued.  

But I would agree with you that he is a fetishist when it comes to renewables. He has his preferences and will not consider any other type of renewable energy. That's one of his well known weaknesses.

WWII?

Government rationing?

Clearly none of you have made the move to the 21st Century.

There will be energy abundance and it will be clean...powered by Hydrogen.

Come...lift your foot, and put one leg inside the 21st Century!