I was afraid that the commission had been stocked with industry representatives, so I was very pleasantly surprised that their goals even exceeded Gov. Kaine's mandate.

Too bad that Commission Chairman L. Preston Bryant (Gov. Kaine's Secretary of Natural Resources) cast the deciding vote to kill a moratorium on new coal plants until carbon sequestration technology becomes available.

Gov. Kaine should do whatever he can to implement the recommendations via executive order and regulation.  General Assembly Democrats should quickly turn other recommendations into legislation and push it hard, emphasizing energy independence, lower costs for consumers, green job creation, healthier air, etc.  Opponents should be targeted for defeat in the next election.

With reduced state tax revenues hampering his early education proposals and no opportunity to run for reelection, this may be Gov. Kaine's last chance for a legacy.

So, we are projecting a $973 million shortfall for 2009.  We project a shortfall of $1.5 billion for 2010.  Mind you these are only projections and things could always be worse depending upon how the national economic crisis hits Virginia.

Given that, how would you or how would you expect the governor to put initiatives like the Climate Change Commission's suggestions in place?  Many of those initiatives require state funds.  So, in a tight year, what would you give up to, for example, fund a $10 million (5 year, I think) consumer education initiative at the SCC?  How would you finance or expect the governor (or gubernatorial candidates) to finance energy efficiency improvements in government facilities?

If you were elected to the House of Delegates and faced a similar Republican majority, what would you prioritize in this regard and how would you work within your caucus and across the aisle to get those priorities into passed legislation?

The other question I have is on the use of the term cheap energy.  The poster above and you have both used cheap as an adjective to describe the energy you are after.  Placing requirements on the state's regulated utilities will require outlays on their parts that will be recovered through rates from consumers.  Whether you are talking about EE programs, building new plants, shuttering old plants, upgrading transmission, all of those items would be recovered from consumers.  So, are you setting a false expectation that power will be cheap in Virginia after implementing all of the green initiatives?  And might setting false expectations create a backlash later?  Virginia is in lower half of electricity prices in the nation.  We rank 35th in residential prices and 39th in total kwh price.  So when you say cheap, relative to what?  

How about we cancel the $2 billion we're about to spend on a new coal-fired power plant?

The billion dollars will be spent by a private entity, not the state government.  So, that would not put money in state coffers to fund some of these initiatives.  If you wanted to eliminate this, in order to lessen the burden of other impositions you will be making on rate payers, that is certainly an option.  Though I would say not a realistic one considering the composition of the state legislature.  

Since you have added this point to the mix, I'd also like to ask whether you oppose natural gas fired generation.  If you could get Dominion to change the coal plant in Wise to a natural gas one, would that be an acceptable compromise to you?  Or even on a larger scale, if Dominion converted some of their existing coal plants to natural gas, would that work for you?