Mayor Bloomberg speaking at some energy conference this week said he wants to explore going all out to battle Chicago for the title of Windy City. He wants to study the feasibility of putting small turbines atop skyscrapers, offshore New York and in industrial parks where tall buildings do not block out the wind.

The next day, the NY Times has a followsup article that pointed out that it would make more sense pursuing solar since there is more sun than wind resources in New York year around. One expert said that an investment in solar might pay for itself faster than wind, and it would be cranking at max in the summer afternoons when peak demand is registered.

I say good for Bloomberg. Go for achieving 10 percent of generation through wind - and go for solar. I think by aggressively pushing alternative energy to the max, its econmomics will soon assert itself. Costs will come down, technology will improve. And we can all get on the same page of saying we need to do all the rest - clean coal, clean nuclear and so forth.

The large illustration accompanying the Times' piece, a Statue of Liberty holding a wind turbine aloft, is intriguing. Unlike some of my journalistic brethren who think the potential of clean energy is being over-hyped, I say that getting people more aware of their reliance on electricity, and the challenges of producing it from what ever source is all to the good. A turbine atop the lady of New York harbor, however fanciful, would get people to stop. And think. Come to think of it, liberty and electricity have a lot in common. Without both, we would truly be in the dark.