the end of the world will be televised

The rising demand for flat-screen televisions could have a greater impact on global warming than the world's largest coal-fired power stations, a leading environmental scientist warned yesterday.

Actually, NF3 is primarily used in the manufacturing of microchips. Only about a quarter goes to making LCD screens, and apparently none is used in the making of plasma screens. Your computer is more responsible than your TV.

That doesn't make me feel any better.

Wind turbines disrupt local environments in such a way that may actually prevent natural processes that mitigate the effects of particulate pollutants. Water wave turbines pose similar threats to underwater environments. Ethanol fuel may in fact yield less energy than it takes to produce it. Hydrogen's cool as far as energy goes if you enjoy blowing up. Solar technology is prohibitively expensive and fuel cell technology has been stalled for a decade. Dick Cheney apparently has final authority over wording in the EPA's statemets of findings. The only certainty is that if the earth is not obliterated by a huge space rock, it will eventually be devoured by the sun. Low tar cigarettes will kill you just as quickly as the full flavors. And 'Meet Dave' opens today to wide release. There is no reason to have any hope at all.

Ethanol fuel may in fact yield less energy than it takes to produce it.

Corn ethanol is wildy inefficient, but it's not the only type of ethanol there is. Sugar ethanol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil) is actually quite efficient. We're just stupidly attached to corn ethanol here because we have lots of farmers in the US that grow corn.

Hydrogen's cool as far as energy goes if you enjoy blowing up.

The problem with hydrogen is that it's hard to acquire. It may be the most abundant element in the universe, but most of it is tied up in the sun and water. As far as it being explosive? I've never understood that argument. Yeah, we wouldn't want to use a fuel source that's flammable and potentially explosive! How dangerous! And how would we transport it?! Thank goodness for good ol' perfectly safe gasoline. WTFBBQ?

Solar technology is prohibitively expensive and fuel cell technology has been stalled for a decade.

Solar power is getting more efficient all the time. And it would be doing so even faster if we were investing more time, money, and research into it. But the current energy companies prefer to cling to their ultimately doomed business models because they're making too damn much money right now. They're pretty big on being short-sighted and rolling around in piles of money for the time being.

Count, You make some good points. I simply listed the bumper-sticker objections to the various forms of energy for the sake of sounding morbid and hopeless. Things may not be quite as bad as all that, as you point out. Germany blankets their flat, commercial roof spaces with solar panels and gets something like 12 - 15% of their energy from solar power. I believe the U.S. gets way less than 1% from solar power. But the German government has been creating economic incentive, whereas the U.S. has been slower to act. With regard to the potential of Hydrogen and the associated hurdles, http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/hydrogen.html.