Redford deserves some credit for an apparently honest concern about environmentalism, although someone who lives on 6,000 acres (including a resort where you get to pay him to enjoy nature) shouldn't have a lot to say about some people using more than their "share" of natural resources. He also deserves credit for his support of the film industry, and I can forgive him a lot just because he made the great movie, "The Natural."

But...

Redford is, of course, basically technologically ignorant. That he is ignorant of economics also goes without saying. Like many others, he firmly believes that the laws of nature and economics can be easily thwarted by the liberal application of that All Purpose Universal Wonder Cure, Federal funding. I'm sure he suspects that only the wicked machinations of Evil Corporations are keeping cheap 90 mpg cars off the roads, and that cheap solar power for everyone is just a matter of another "Apollo Project * "

"We could invest in public transit..." (Sound of blowing lunch across an entire 8-lane highway.) I think a dollar or two has already been invested in "public transit" in this country. Few, if any, are profitable. Most suck public funds up like a jet plane intake.

As for fuel cells, when we get hydrogen wells, or a sufficient nuclear power infrastructure to crack hydrogen, it may make some sense as a primary power source. When discussing cells that "crack" hydrocarbon fuel for its hydrogen, ask yourself two questions: How efficient are they, and where the heck is all the carbon going?

The quickest non-hydrocarbon solution to our energy problems is a program of safe, standardized nuclear power plant construction. Does anyone ever wonder why France can tell everyone to bite wind while the U.S. wallows in various political tar pits in the Middle East, desperate for their oil?

*Notable for providing us all with cheap access to space...