flynn23 wrote:
] Until the US MANDATES development of sustainable energy, it
] will not happen in a meaningful way in which the US will
] benefit. Notice that I didn't say it won't happen period. It
] WILL happen, because unlike the Cold War days of the early
] 60s, there are other nations which have the capabilities,
] accumen, and cultural aptitude to take advantage of this
] opportunity and leap frog everyone else. The question is not
] IF, it's WHO.

[ You make good and salient points. I think a mandate of this sort is necessary, and it needs to come in the form of large budgets for R & D. Unfortunately, even if Kerry is elected, he's gonna have his hands so full digging us out of the enormous hole W put us in, that I'm not convinced there'll be money available. Still, it wouldn't be a stretch to say that all that money is going to develop technologies which will untie us from the volatile Middle East and prevent stupid pointless wars in the future.

To tack on a little to the end of your post, it's also a matter of when. 2050 ain't good enough. Even the best predictions put us smack in the middle of financial crisis due to a lack of non-OPEC oil by that time, so this shit needs to happen on an accelerated scale, which means it'll cost more. Alas, even after paying $2 a gallon at the pump, americans aren't likely to be in favor of large alternative energy investments, not to mention the auto industry, power industry, and so on. It's a political 3rd rail that's gonna take some real balls to grasp. I hope someone's up to it. -k]

RE: Smart buildings gain momentum