If you read the article I linked to you would see that the concept of supply and demand is at the heart of it.
Massive new supply is coming on line by 2010, and most of it is not spoken for.
It usually pays to read information before attempting a critique. :-)

Everyone else made a point of staying clear enhancing my belief that nobody really wants to hit a bike. It's just too expensive.

It's not always a matter of intention. But you're absolutely right about it being expensive. How much for a human life?

Car crashes into bike race -- do not click if squeamish.

jteehan writes:

"Per a discussion here a few days ago, I decided to commute home yesterday by bicycle from Santa Clara to Hollister via downtown San Jose. I would describe it as 59 miles of congested city and narrow countries roads."

You should be beat. I don't know of anyone who consistently cycle commutes over 8 miles in one direction unless they are multi-modal, ie bike to bus or train to work, back on bike/train to home.

You deserve a fricken' medal for trying a 59 mile commute. Either that or you really are crazy. B^)

I posted the following articles a few days ago. The articles are from the Financial Times and come with a graph that shows that in the year 2010, estimated supply of solar cells will be 17 gigawatts and demand only 8 gigawatts. I guess they mean that prices will drop substantially so as to allow uptake of all this excess production. Please understand that I am just the messenger here.
Silver lining in solar power storm clouds

The solar power business is bracing itself for a collapse in prices that could lead to a shake-out in one of the most promising areas of the renewable energy sector.

...

According to Dean Cooper, analyst at Ambrian, the global capacity for production of photovoltaic equipment - the biggest section of solar power technology which converts sunlight directly into electricity - is set to increase "dramatically", from 3 gigawatts last year to 15 to 20 gigawatts of production in 2010. Much of the growth is coming from China.
Prices for solar components would drop from about $3.80 per watt to about $1.40 a watt by 2010, he said. That could prompt consolidation in the sector within the next six months, with smaller players falling prey to longer established companies.

Squeeze is on as interest grows in solar sector

The problems facing the solar sector exemplify the growing pains of a small industry.
The revenues from solar panels - or photovoltaics - stood at only $21.2bn last year, according to Lux Research, despite three decades of technological development.
Lux forecasts they will reach $71bn in 2012 even though the industry faces falling margins, a squeeze on subsidies and an oversupply of the components.

It would seem that it is good news. Naturally, I would like to know whether it is too early to take a deep breath.

In the future, you might consider driving from your home to some intermediate point where you can safely park your car for the day, and cycling the rest of the way in. Most of the bumper-to-bumper, stop -and-go congestion that you'll see will be on that leg closest to work, and you might very well make better time on a bike than by driving. On the other hand, once you get out of the city the traffic thins out, and you'll be able to drive at a more steady speed and get hugely better gas mileage on that leg. You'll also be driving during those segments of your route when it is most likely to be dark in the wintertime, so your personal safety will be less at risk than it would be if you attempted to drive it.

As Carl Sagan said: "We are all made of star-stuff!". He and Stephen Jay Gould did more to debunk the mixing of belief systems and science than almost anyone else that popular, in my view.

I'm no physicist or cosmologist, but I have read a lot of grumbling about how a lot of the new physics like string theory or cosmological theory like the big bang are basically untestable using the scientific method. If you can't test it via experimentation, does it not take on an element of belief? I'm not saying that this is the point the author made nor that he's correct, I'm simply making an observation about the state of science.