I once went to a product announcement that served several cases of wine that sold for $10K per bottle.

Rich people are not all stupid. Their behavior, however, when they're spending money that they view as an inexhaustible resource, can be pretty reckless. It's like the government when it's spending YOUR money.

However, most of the investment in the solar, wind, and hydrogen energy generation future is being made by the same people who presently control the fossil-fuel generation and petroleum industry. They're interested in profits within their own lifetimes, and couldn't care a whit whether the world ends the day after they depart.

They're the ones who are making sure the oil and coal are all gone before anyone makes reasonable progress in the U.S. toward a hydrogen-based economy. They're the ones who are dragging their feet in the wind generation efforts. They're the ones who want to promote ethanol, which uses more petroleum than it saves us, yet costs more, agricultural subsidies aside.

They're also the same guys who buy those 43-thousand square foot houses that waste more energy than ever before, and they're the ones who want to ruin the last pristine wildlife refuge in the north slope just to gain, and ultimately export, about three months' U.S. supply of petroleum.

If the government were truly interested in improving our energy situation, it would subsidize independent efforts in photovoltaic single-home energy generation systems so we could get away from the huge losses due to transimission and distribution inefficiencies.

If the government were truly interested in improving the U.S. energy situation, they'd ration gasoline, and adjust the price paid on the basis of consumption. If you use 10 gallons per week, you could buy those ten gallons at a subsidized price, say, $2 per gallon. If you use 20 gallons per week, you'd be allowed to buy those 20 gallons at $20 per gallon. If you use 30 gallons per week, you'd be allowed to buy those 30 gallons for $200 per gallon. If you use 40 gallons, well, hope you've got a lot of money ... That would lead to more telecommuting. It would move people close to where they need to be.

If the government were truly truly interested in improving the air pollution and greenhouse gas emission situation, they'd tax vehicles on the basis of their tailpipe output and not on just on their gross vehicle weight. If the government were truly interested in reducing both fuel consumption and pollution impacts of transporting goods around the country, they'd tax vehicles proportionally to their impact on the roadways and not just linearly on their weight. The same road that can, without showing any wear, support the passing of a million volkswagon beetles a day, is damaged forever by the passage of only one semi-tractor with a trailerload of 10WF120's for a new building. The beetles pay 1000x the cost of their impact on the roadway, while the semi pays .000001x its impact.

You think there's no conspiracy? Just look at where the cabinet came from. Gale Norton, formerly a suspect in several corruption and embezlement cases here in the Colorado government, and formerly an assistant to the disgraced Interior Secretary, James Watt, has recently left the government so that she could avoid becoming the focus of a number of investigations of corruption in her role in allocating public land resource usage.

These people are corrupt. Their party is corrupt, and they can achieve their ends only by working together. In what way is that not a conspiracy?

RE