Global warming debate needs new direction

The debate over global warming has taken a wrong direction.

Too much of the debate involves whether global warming actually is occurring; whether, if occurring, it is accelerating; and — assuming the troposphere is getting warmer — how much humans are responsible.

Such a debate largely is pointless when there is so much room for agreement. Cal Thomas’ column today notes one area of consensus. A push to develop alternative fuels should be a national priority.

This would be a great time to start. Oil companies claim to have known reserves of the reigning champ of fossil fuels, crude oil, which should last decades. We should seriously develop alternatives for powering automobiles before that supply runs dry.

While we’re developing alternative energy sources for our vehicles, we also could use more options for generating electricity.

This brings us to another area of accord. Regardless of whether people are causing the planet to warm, there is no reason to continue polluting its atmosphere when we can develop sources of energy that are easier on our environment. Development of renewable, sustainable, cleaner energy sources should be a public — and private — goal.

The only real remaining argument is how we can achieve these goals of reducing reliance on fossil fuels and increasing the use of cleaner energy technologies, what the public cost should be and how that cost should be borne.

Let the debate begin anew.