China seems to have the insight into seeing that green energy is the wave of the future and will ultimately will be more cost effective than relying on the world dwindling non-renewable resources. Will this set a dramatic new precedent for the USA, who has been dragging its feet?

Nothing like good old fashioned competition to get the ball rolling on an idea.

what type of engineer is responsible in creating green technology and solar energy?

MECHANICAL ENGINEER

A. There is more pollution with green energy sources
B. it is better for our envioronment
C. renewable energy sources are hard to replenish
D. all of the above
E. none of the above

Those don’t make any sense. Because there is LESS pollution with green energy sources and if it is REnewable then it is EASY to replenish. So its E or B…

I am interested in the renewable energy, green field, etc. And i want to know if there are some universities offering these kind of online courses.

All courses and degrees dealing with "renewable energy" or "green field" without prerequisite degrees in Science or Engineering are bullbleep.

Students need a background in Science or Engineering (preferably Engineering) before they can understand energy issues. Otherwise, graduates of these phony courses just become loud and ignorant shrieking nuisances.

People around the world are using it, I’ve ridden the clean quiet green public transit systems,
I’ve seen the windmills, ridden the bike lanes, etc. I’ve showered with the solar shower, turned on the lights and watched TV on the web with it too. And it wasn’t expensive.
Conservatives are against it, and they say it’s just too expensive.
Should I believe them? Is it wrong to believe my own eyes and ears?

I live in a country where we have a lot of green solar and wind energy.

people don’t support it because they don’t make as much money from it as eventually you can have your own solar and wind turbine so you don’t have to buy it from electrico grids.

Will the environment continue to be attacked
because letting those evolution touting, sex loving,
precarity hating, environmentalists win would be too hard?
Will the Congress refuse to even debate green energy development
before killing it?

That’s their goal. The only non-fossil fuel energy source they seem to support is nuclear energy, which also happens to be extremely expensive - moreso than many renewable sources.

I think the main problem is that a lot of Republicans get a lot of funding from the oil companies. You may have heard about Rep. Barton apologizing to BP yesterday for making them pay to clean up the environmental catastrophe they caused. It’s not a coincidence that Barton is the top House of Representatives recipient of money from the oil and gas industry.
http://climateprogress.org/2010/06/18/barton-apology-bp/

Another reason is that many conservatives have this irrational hatred of ‘environmentalists’. So Republicans know that by blocking green energy legislation, they won’t lose votes from these anti-environmentalists.

At this point it’s up to the Democrats. They need to put forth serious climate and energy legislation. If the Republicans want to block it, then make them block it. Make them put their votes on the record. Let it be known to future Americans that the Republican Party blocked clean energy legislation. Democrats can’t give up just because they don’t think the legislation won’t pass.

There are all kinds of problems with an economy dependent on oil. Why do we act as though the gulf oil spill is the first disaster because of the oil industry.
- the EXXON spill in 1989
- the murder of Ken Wiwa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Saro-Wiwa
- the connection between oil production and cancer rates.

If we invest in Green Energy we will have less of these incidents in the future. If we don’t, we will not survive on this planet.

OIL = MONEY. In the 70’s there was a period time when American people could only buy gas on odd or even days depending on matching the last digit of their license plate. There was outrage and concern then and proponents of alternative energy sources spoke out. Their warnings were unheeded. Fast forward 40 years. We are paying the price for greedy oil companies and lawmakers who profit from big oil. The bp disaster is what happens when corporations are greedy and will stop at nothing to make that money! An investment in Green Energy is a necessity. Americans have been told it is not possible to make a great car that does not run on gas. We have been told there are limitations to Green Energy. We have been told that we need oil to survive. We have been told, "No, You Can’t." This is a nation of inventors, brilliant people who CAN make Green Energy and renewable energy work for us. We have to break the strangle hold that big oil has on our government and our lives. IF we survive the bp oil disaster, we MUST CHANGE.

If he wants to make the Democrats the party of new forms of energy…cleaner and greener energy, and the Republicans the party of big oil and BP…he would crush them on this issue with the general public. Will he use this to pass green energy reform in the next year? Or will he back off because he fears a fundraising backlash from big oil (just like how he backed off significant health care reform because he was scared of the big insurance companies and their money).

Republicans aren’t "the party of big oil and BP." We also see the need to reach out to different forms of energy. We support oil companies and new drilling because that is our primary energy source right now. We can also research new and alternative energy sources, but why should we crush the main source of energy we have right now?

President Obama will probably back off for right now, but if he actually cares about "cleaner and greener energy," then sometime in the near future he will do something about it.

The only way green energy can break even is if our tax dollars are used to subsidize it.

The only green energy plan he has is to make us pay more money to use existing technology.

Why is he so misleading?

Whether you believe it or not coal and oil reserves will eventually run out.
I’d prefer not to have to go back to candles and horses.

Which is more profitable green or old energy (coal, oil, etc)?

What will make the difference?

Green vs. greenbacks.

It’s a balance we’ve been told we have to accept. But somebody who knows a lot more about making greenbacks than the vast majority of people says it’s not so. Google CEO Eric Schmidt has patiently been telling Google investors not to worry about the company’s massive interest in the US energy grid. Changes have to be made to the way energy gets transported around the country in order for renewable sources of energy to play a larger role, and Google is in on the ground floor, along with IBM, Cisco, GE and others.

But the investors would still like Schmidt to show them the money.

At the WSJ’s ECO:nomics conference in California, Mr. Schmidt was asked how he would respond to Google shareholders who worry the Internet titan is taking its eye off the ball by paying so much attention lately to alternative energy.

"Money we save on energy goes straight to the bottom line. Lower costs mean higher earnings. Green energy done right is more profitable than old energy," Mr. Schmidt said. "Is that a crisp enough answer for you?"

He cited Google’s own multi-trillion dollar blueprint for overhauling the U.S. energy mix. Sure, the pricetag looks hefty–but it would more than pay for itself.

"That’s $3.5 trillion, but over 22 years, not a matter of months," Mr. Schmidt said. "And the benefit would be $4.4 trillion."

But don’t blame the investors for asking — it’s a confusing issue, and one that’s bound to come up very frequently for a while, since President Obama has committed to spending some $4.5 billion on smart grid technology. Schmidt was, of course, a big Obama supporter during the election.

Grist’s David Roberts has a primer (with maps, which we all know I love) on the tangled problem of the national energy grid vs. the "smart grid."

• First, there aren’t many high-voltage lines that go to the places where renewable energy is most abundant (e.g., the Southwest for solar, the Midwest for wind).

• Second, right now there are (depending on how you count) anywhere from three to seven distinct regional grids that make up the national grid, and they aren’t very well connected. While juice circulates relatively freely within these grids, it’s difficult to get juice from one grid to another.