[LonghornFreeper]

I have to disagree with you about this being a socialist idea. I am a strong conservative, but there is nothing socialist about liking clean air. I have been in Los Angeles and Houston and seen what smog is like. Even my home city of Dallas has its own cloud. I think many "conservatives" of today would have written off the Wright brothers, Henry Ford, Fulton, and many others as socialists, simply because they had new ideas. Just think, with this technology we could tell OPEC to collectivly jump in a lake. Many things we take for granted today, the Internet and commercial satellites just to name a couple, might never have gotten started without a push from the government.

[goldstategop]

My thoughts exactly. The market will never do it on its own but if the government gives it a big push, it'll happen. And our economy will be stronger and just think of the benefits of not having to import oil from a volatile region of the planet. All of which will enhance the quality of our environment, our standard of living, and our national security. Its what I would call environmentalism with a conservative tinge. Let's not cede clean air and pure water to the enviro wackos.

[mrsmith]

"To a business executive, who must focus on profits, the added cost of fuel cell power is usually prohibitive. But for America as a whole, and indeed humanity as a whole, the cost difference is relatively small. Why? Because price comparisons don’t account for the massive secondary cost of fossil fuels: air pollution, global warming, and the fact that our oil supply is finite. "

That is what makes this article "socialist kook bait".

"with this technology we could tell OPEC to collectivly jump in a lake"
Sure, if the cost to the economy (you and me) is reasonable; using nuclear power the cost could be less than our energy cost now.

[cinFLA]

I think many "conservatives" of today would have written off the Wright brothers, Henry Ford, Fulton, and many others as socialists, simply because they had new ideas.

You have no idea what conservatives think.

[unspun]

Don't worry about the "delete unconstitutional government" folks here in FR. (Ever look in to the Drug Wars threads? Sheesh.) They have a good point, but the best solution would be to carefully and conservatively amend the Constitution as well as complying by it.

(We can start with reversing Roe/Doe.)

[maui_hawaii]

I am a strong conservative, but there is nothing socialist about liking clean air.

Good comments both of you. I am not about to chain myself to a friggin tree, or join greenpeace, but if we can do this, why not? If we don't have to import a bunch of friggin oil afterwards, I call that one helluva good investment.

Sheerly economic wise, if we had a hydrogen plant in several states making the gas we burn right here at home... that is a very good deal. We would not have all that money being leaked out to overseas.

Environmentally, yeah, who likes the stink of smog?

Plus who says we can't use new technology in cars? It works for PCs but why would cars be off limits? Those new technologies would boost the auto makers, as well as introduce a great deal of new domestic industries to the US.

This to me is a win, win, win situation. Clean air, less dependence, and overall a good economic investment.

[cinFLA]

I think many "conservatives" of today would have written off the Wright brothers, Henry Ford, Fulton, and many others as socialists, simply because they had new ideas. Just think, with this technology we could tell OPEC to collectivly jump in a lake. Many things we take for granted today, the Internet and commercial satellites just to name a couple, might never have gotten started without a push from the government.

Your logic is twisted. You mish-mash government programs and private initiative.

[cinFLA]

Many things we take for granted today, the Internet and commercial satellites just to name a couple, might never have gotten started without a push from the government.

And why NOT?