Updated from the original blog entry
The Anti-Candidate's Position on ENERGY
Long-term energy needs require long-term energy solutions, and petroleum is not a long-term solution. Fossil fuels in general aren't long-term solutions, because we're not making enough fossils these days to replace the fuels.
It's possible biotechnology will solve the hydrocarbon-fuel dilemma by producing plants that scrub and store more carbon and microorganisms that produce fuel-grade hydrocarbons as byproducts of digestion. That may take a decade or two (or five), but it would give a whole new meaning to "carbon cycle." It would be like accelerating time. But we digress.
Low-impact energy production is fantastic -- solar, wind, wave, geothermal -- but won't ever scale up to the power we need to run the modern world. (Don't start with the "we shouldn't use so much power" argument. Turn off your computer right now if it's so important to you.)
With all that in mind, we are most in favor of nuclear power. We've read about a lot of new designs that make nuclear power safer -- including some great new ideas that can make smaller, safer nuclear facilities and provide power to the entire world for centuries. That's a long-term solution.
So how's this for an energy slogan: "A fast breeder reactor in every garage." Okay, maybe not, but you get the idea.