And you're choosing to ignore the geopolitical, sociological, and economic implications...why? Do you [i]choose[/i] to be deluded, or are you just failing to wrap your head around it?

Let's pretend for the sake of argument that solar paneling is a feasible way of fueling an entire country right now. All 54 billion square feet that we'd need to fuel the USA if it happened tomorrow. Let's pretend it will never be cloudy and that we'd get as much sunlight in the winter months as we do in the summer.

Are you choosing deliberately to forget that lobbyists and think-tanks in the pockets of the coal and oil industries are still going to try to impede your progress every step of the way? Are you choosing to forget that a single panel costs $250 right now, and that millions of them will cost several billions of dollars? (Because you cannot appeal to the common good when you want thousands of workers setting these things up; they have families to feed just like most other taxpayers. They're not going to do it for free, no matter how charismatic a speech you think you can give.) Are you forgetting that if the government doesn't subsidize those building costs, it's coming out of the taxpayers, some of whom will object to the project? Are you forgetting that in addition to the cost of setting up the solar panels, you'll also need to build the lines which transport this electricity country-wide (because more than likely they'd have to be built in a flat, sunny area like the southwest)? And what about the non-contiguous states? Will Alaska and Hawaii see their taxes go up to subsidize solar panels which they won't even benefit from, since the electricity won't be able to travel across the Pacific ocean, and since Canada will probably give us shit for building these lines through their territories? Or is Alaska not going to receive this new electricity? Is that fair to them? Furthermore, if, for whatever reason (like, I don't know, the aforementioned clouds), there's less electricity than the country needs, how do you plan on enforcing a nationwide rationing plan so that critical infrastructure has its needs met before the general public do? Will there be priority lists of who deserves electricity more during times of scarcity? Will this be challenged as an assault upon people's civil rights, and as a staunch class divide and offensive inequality in a supposedly free nation?

The degree of tunnel-vision with which you're approaching this discussion is ludicrous.