The Dems are holding the door wide open for the Reps on this issue, but I bet the Reps will not come together with industry to counter the green's claims. So many votes could be picked up through this issue. The green argument is so full of holes with dire economic impact upon the U.S. economy but some how the Reps will fumble the ball. Its a shame, but what can you say when Bush allows this type of dissent and leadership from his own cabinet members and McCain is leading the green's cause.
Sometimes it seesm that the "sky-is-falling" hysteria that comes from the enviro-wackos can only be matched by the "ski-will-fall" hysteria from their opponents regarding the economic impact predicted.
In every single circumstance ever, the cost of reducing emissions or pollutants have been far lower than industry estimates.
In the case of reducing CO2 greate efficiency and lower fuel use might actually offset the increased cost of energy. The increase in energy security by using wind and fuel grown in America will have a huge positive impact as well.
In this circumstance Novak is acting as a mouthpiece for Exxon and the power companies who own old coal fired plants.
Let him come with a solution to America's dependence on foreign oil before bemoaning the cost.
What would the world look like if we had just spent(borrowed) $500-$800 billion to build wind-turbines and nuclear power plants and covert American automobiles to plug-in hybrids?
Oil would be $10 a gallon. The Russians and Iranians would be hat in hand, and Saddam might have fallen anyway.