John Stossel: Going "green"
John F. Stossel is an American consumer reporter, investigative, journalist, author and libertarian columnist. (http://en.wikipedia.org)

In the article entitled Going “green”, John Stossel puts up the argument that going green- replacing all dirty energy with clean ones, using less energy, and recycling etc. -is meaningless and costs money. The writer approaches to the topic pessimistic. Contrary the assertion of Al Gore’s group, Repower America, he introduces counter arguments of Robert Bryce, author of “Power Hungry: The myths of ‘Green’ Energy.” For example; according to Bryce, due to 9 out of 10 units of power that we consume are produced hydrocarbons; the transition away from these sources would takes decades. In addition to it, the efficiency that we get from renewable energy sources is not enough to meet our needs. For instance, gasoline has 80 times energy density of the best lithium ion battery.
In the writing, unless the advocates of green-jobs he believes that the transition to” green” is costly. I actually kind agree with Stossel’s that point. It is just not possible to do it cost free. However he lost me with this line "If wind and solar power were practical, entrepreneurs would invest in it." What he simply says is “forget about environment, let’s keep burning oil and warming the planet.” I believe that, while we taking an economic decision which interests our environment, we should consider not only immediate effects, also long term effects. If solar power were not practical, we should search ways to make it practical and preferable. As you know diminishing energy sources and danger of environmental pollution are pushing the world to search for the alternative energy sources. In 2020, Turkey was predicted to be 400-500 billion kWh of energy requirement and only 200billion kWh energy can be produced from its own