[spinestein]

[While few are on the road now, electric cars are gaining a smattering of adherents. Some hobbyists are building plug-in hybrids, which run almost completely on electricity, while start-up Tesla Motors next month will start selling an all-electric sports car.]


Electric cars make a LOT of sense within city limits where typical traffic is limited to stop and go driving at speeds rarely exceeding 40-50 mph. And charging the cars off the grid powered by more nuclear plants makes even more sense.

There are plenty of alternative energy sources to choose from and they all have their pros and cons, depending on where you live and what your needs are. The environmentalist activists seem to condemn every alternative EXCEPT for solar panels, which they practically worship as the salvation of humanity.

[beavus]

So true. The only reason any large household use of solar power is economic today is because of government subsidies. Don't get me wrong--technology is making great strides and solar power is becoming more and more useful, but it is a LONG way from being as cheap as fossil fuels.

Environmentalists who support electric cars don't seem to realize that the electricity must come from somewhere, and in this country 80% of it is either fossil fuels or hydroelectric. The same would be true for hydrogen. So the question is really whether nuclear power is safer, cheaper, cleaner, and makes us more secure, than fossil fuels. Well, once tort reform eliminates frivolous lawsuits against safe new reactors, the answer will be an unmitigated "YES!"