[Scrappy]

I like Pickens' plan. It's spelled out, and seems feasible, maybe not for complete independence, but definitely for decreased dependence. There are incentives for companies to go with renewable energy, but they are not incredibly advantageous, especially when it comes to using technology and fuel sources currently available and the cost of implementing them versus the alternative renewables. When you put up windmills, the payoff is much farther in the distance than even putting in a nuclear power plant, concerning how much you put in up front and maintenance till it begins paying for itself. I have no problem with nuclear (two more plants in FL ), but if people want companies to invest in renewable energy, the federal government will have to do something. Right now, it's a 2-4 decade payoff for going with renewable versus a decade payoff for going with conventional power plant.

Concerning coal... as fuel for power plants, coal is an excellent source of energy, and it is a huge resource that the US has at it's disposal. And can, with the right technology, be just as clean as natural gas, thus we can use it to help the transition.

Transportation, till we get some form of engine, fuel, and production of the fuel combination that's by weight more efficient than diesel/gas/natural gas, were stuck with those choices. Fuel cell may be great and clean, but production of hydrogen is tough, and the fuel cell is currently limited in it's ability to generate power -- great for small vehicles, not yet able to generate enough efficiently enough for larger loads.

Out of all the stuff I've heard batted back and forth across the internet, Pickens Plan is the best yet, I think it needs some work, but I don't think it won't help.