Bob,

Right now the real focus is on developing very targeted and innovative legislative concepts. The ESCBs as the leading edge as a path to foster real moves toward a more energy efficient infrastructure across the nation:

The ESCBs

* set up a balance between Federal and Local government contributions and responsibilities -- a partnership;
foster iterative learning, from one town to another, from one project/program to the next
* build capacity, using the government wisely spending taxpayer money (and lowering tomorrow's financial burden on the taxpayer) to help create an infrastructure that will enable businesses and private individuals (across the country) to pursue energy efficiency and renewable energy with greater ease and, likely, at lower cost
* are not just Energy Smart, but also financially smart (bonds will pay for themselves), environmentally smart (reduce pollution), health smart (people in energy efficient structures (on average) are healthier, productivity smart (LEED structures have 10-15% higher productivity), etc ...

Now, as we revisit a grander vision, does it make sense to explore what are the best paths forward? Sure, we should engage in discussion.

My personal preference is for a Global Warming Impact Fee (GWIF), with heavy penalties in place for imports from any country that does not have an auditable equivalent. For a rough discussion of a GWIF (which merits updating), see: http://energysmart.wordpress.com/2007/04/19/global-warming-impact-fee-ha...

auntiegrav,
people just want to have fun, and they think loud, fast stuff is fun. But, Ford Chrysler and GM make more per unit of production when they make the SUV's and monster trucks, so both consumer's and manufacturers are at fault

What we need are bumper stickers that say I DRIVE THIS BECAUSE I HAVE A LITTLE PENIS and slap 'em on the vehicles parked down at the mall
Bob Ebersole