Anemone- Thanks for dropping by and for leaving a comment. I’m glad you found this essay valuable and hope that I can continue to be a voice of reason.

BonJ- It’s good to hear that the younger generations are recognizing the need for this kind of advancement. We must foster those sentiments and help them grow. But I don’t think that they are the only hope. It is incumbent on all of us today to not only encourage their interest, but to begin the quest for new energy sources today, so that they will have a base from which to continue.
Glad to have you drop by again.

John Galt- Thanks for the compliments and you’re more than welcome to link to my blog. The more the merrier, I say. (And don’t worry about the typo’s!)

I actually develop my posts from my own thoughts and concerns, based upon the practical experiences of my life, my interactions with others, and Common Sense. I have not read the two sources you cite, but am an avid reader of many topics. My references to the JFK speech were more to indicate that leadership requires the courage to plainly state your goals and then inspire the country to achieve them.

Cranky- Good to hear from you again. I’m not really a “green nut” either, but I do feel that we need to do better by the planet if we want to continue to enjoy it for many generations to come. As for the economic benefits of finding a new energy source, of course there are many. However, I don’t necessarily put forth this essay from an economic standpoint. True, the need for new energy sources will directly affect our economic situation at some point, so why wait?

The cost of doing nothing is failure.

Todd- I don’t think that I implied that our space missions were meant for any other purpose than to further mankind’s knowledge. However, since you mention it, the indirect benefits of the advancement of technology due to the space program has undoubtedly benefited the medical business along with all the rest.

If the missions to space were to foster hope, than the quest for new energy should also offer that same hope, in addition to all the other benefits I mentioned.

Thanks for the comment and for stopping by.

Mac- If alternatative, clean, cheap sources of energy existed outside of fossil fuels, then yes, I think other nations, especially developing ones would jump on board. Why would they spend more money than necessary when better options were available. Also, with some courage, the developers of this new energy, whether it is the U.S. or not, could share their newfound knowledge with the our allies.

As for the problem with the lawmakers and oil barons, that can only be changed through the election process, which requires education, information, and participation. This is the longer way to get there, but the legal way. It’s not impossible…it’s sometimes amazing how a few voices can stir the pot. Just take a look at the fundamentalist religious coup d’etat of the current administration and its party.

To amswer your final question, we start by leading the charge in finding or adapting new energy sources. Then, we share our knowledge with others. If so many who signed the Kyoto Treaty are sincere in their resolutions, they should be all too willing to make a change when an alternative becomes available.

SheaNC- Again, let’s vote ’em out. Let’s get the word around and spread some Common Sense so that people will make more informed choices. No one likes to get screwed, they just think they have no choice. With enough voices, we don’t have to get screwed any more.

Kudos Ken!

It needs to now. We don’t need to wait to perfect the science to move forward. That’s a chicken and egg scenario. If the backing is there, the tech will bet better. We could already reduce most of our gasoline consumption by moving to mixed fuel\hybrid cars. It will cost money – but so do all investments. The bigger question is what is the cost of doing nothing?