Yesterday, I sent out an action alert asking people to get in touch with President Obama -- and ask him to stop supporting nukes, oil, and coal, in favor of renewable energy like wind and solar power. 

Pretty basic right? Well known environmental groups asks the member of their e-activist list to support clean energy instead of dirty energy. 

Which is why I was shocked to get responses from people calling me dirty names, a 'leftist Berkeley' type, or just flat out telling me I was stupid and/or crazy for articulating our position on nuclear power (and to a lesser degree, the coal and oil industry). 

It's one thing to disagree with me -- I get that -- but it's another to lose all civility. I have to say, if someone wants to get me on their side, calling me names isn't really going to work. 

That being said, I'd like to clarify some things. 

1. In 2007, according to the Department of Energy, 84.9% of our energy comes from fossil fuels. This includes coal (22.43%), coal coke (.02%), natural gas (23.28%), and petroleum (39.77%)

2. In 2007, nuclear power accounted for 8.29% of our energy

3. In 2007, 6.71% of our energy came from 'renewable sources', this includes biomass (3.54%), biofuels (1.01%), waste (.42%), wood (2.11%), geothermal (.34%), hydroelectric (2.41%), solar (.08%), and wind (.34%)

4. I'm not a complete idiot

My point -- Environmental Action's point -- is that instead of investing yet more billions in energy sources that are dirty, unreliable, and already make up the vast majority of our energy sources (fossil fuels and nukes account for 93.18% of our energy), why not go with the new clean, and underutilized energy sources? 

I'm NOT saying, 'stop burning coal', (as much as I would like to). I'm NOT saying 'close down our nuclear plants tomorrow', (as much as I would like to). I'm saying, for decades we're relied almost entirely on energy sources that come with horrific consequences, from global warming to nuclear fallout. 

Meanwhile, we have vastly untapped energy sources in the form of renewables. Let me put a fine point on it. 

If you turn on a light switch 10,000 times, 7.98 of those times, it was thanks to solar power, and 33.59 it was thanks to wind power. The rest is nukes and fossil fuel. 

Given that we're in a horrible energy and environmental quagmire, maybe -- just maybe -- it's time to move some eggs into other baskets. 

Some people emailed me about 'balance' of our energy plans. In no possible mathematical formula would you say that .08% (solar power) balances 8.29% (nuclear). You would, in fact, say there's a wild imbalance.