As you point out, these seem like ambitious goals.. Yet we have wasted thirty years waiting for the market to get us there. And it cannot do so without the right incentives. A convincing president pushing ambitious goals is the only hope of really getting the ball rolling. I imagine the renewable part could be doable with wind, solar, and nuclear. These are key to achieving sevreal of the others.

It will require a portfolio approach, permanent tax incentives, perhaps taxes on fossil fuels. The carbon goals and auto standards strike me as being undoable, but I imagine that with hybrid technologies as standards rather than options we might get a good portion of the way there. Especially if we are willing to accept the idea of smaller cars...

Richardson is not a wide-eyed youth. Between his work in Washington and his term as governor, I think he understands both the DC culture and the challenges of the position of executive. By the time we get to 2009, Americans should start realizing how terribly costly the Iraq war was and be able to rectognize that energy plans such as this are dirt-cheap by comparison. There is a chance of success.

I appreciate the updates, Richardson was invisible to me just a few weeks ago.

Richardson was Energy secretary and knows a thing or two about the subject. He is also afiliated with the Apollo alliance, a group that has done serious studies on alternative energy issues.

I did inhale.

experienced. These are indeed ambitious goals. He was Energy Secretary, after all.

I have a good friend who has been an attorney for whistleblowers in the nuclear industry for nearly twenty years -- a busy life, to be sure. He met Richardson several times when he was Energy Secretary, and found him honest, open-minded, and not afraid to try new things.

"cap and trade, because it rewards people who are already polluting (the more you pollute the more carbon certificates you get, which are worth money) is inferior to a carbon tax."

hmm... who says that his plan calls for allocating carbon credits based on pre-existing levels of carbon emissions, rather than auctioning credits off the the highest bidder (or some other neutral method)?

though is true that every existing carbon trading scheme has had the problem you point out, that's a problem of politics, (namely, regulatory capture), and that is also what will make it very difficult to pass a carbon tax, unfortunately.