BCT Editorial – 6/16/10

“We’re paying the price for foolishly sticking with carbon-based energy?”  Are there technologically and economically equivalent alternative sources of energy I haven’t heard of that can replace “carbon-based energy” (oil and gas also contain hydrogen) for fueling our vehicles, heating our homes, generating electricity, et cetera in the amounts needed?  Are they even on the near horizon?  If not, how can we be “foolish” for “sticking” with the most economically efficient energy sources currently available?  If they exist, why didn’t the editorial tell us which of these alternatives the Times uses?  I didn’t forget about nuclear power, but a review of Times editorials shows it doesn’t like nuclear power plants either.  As I’ve noted before, you can identify leftist approved energy sources because they are not currently technically and/or economically viable enough to provide large amounts of energy.