Saying that the US will never support renewable engergy is a pretty broad and bold statement. The USDE already pretty heavily supports and promotes the use of hydro prowered and wind powered systems. They have an entire department devoted to energy efficeincy, renewable energy, and clean energy. It's not something there for appeasement, they drop billions a year into it. You are right about the lobbying power behind fossil fuels. And that's where the question of a leader's character and resolve comes in. If he believes the country needs and wants it, would he be willing to make the sacrifices. As for renewable energy in general, it's a very wide category that doesn't mean anything more than an energy source that is renewable. It has nothing to do with enviromental impact (that's clean energy or soft energy). Technically wood burning can be viewed as a renewable energy source and all sorts of biodiesels are renewable (although they cut emissions down, they still do a hell of a lot of damage). There's also the ongoing debate of whether or not nuclear power is renewable since there is enough materal for fission available to us to last until the sun dies.
As for the average person not caring, that's where the movie comes in and does a very good job. It raises awareness, gets people off their asses to go out and buy some energy efficient bulbs and weather stripping. That actually makes a huge difference in the long run. Gore did an excellent job of that and he should be commended for it. The question here isn't of the validity or nobility of the message he delivered but of his character, motivation, and specifically dedication.
Yes, solar panels lose energy when converting it, but this is true for absolutely every single energy 'creating' process we know of. It's all about the net energy balance and trying to maximize the ammount of energy transfered compaired to the ammount of energy put in to produce it. That's where all the research dollars go. And scott's right, it is pretty much the definition of a hypocrite.
