Has Al Gore gone too far?

Last week the former vice president and Nobelist called for switching the entire nation's electricity production to non-polluting sources, such as wind, solar and geothermal.

All in 10 years.

It's hard to imagine this happening. To accomplish his goal in a single decade would require a massive, coordinated restructuring of the country's electrical grid, replacing current power plants at a cost of trillions of dollars. It could potentially disrupt the nation's industrial energy base upon which our economy depends. And let's face it: There's little political will for such a monumental change so quickly.

But if Gore is too ambitious, he's also right.

The cost of oil and coal is expected to keep rising as worldwide demand increases. Drilling for more oil won't be enough. Polluting our environment with carbon dioxide is a dead end. Sooner or later, clean, renewable energy will have to be our primary source of electricity. It's simply a matter of when.

Gore's urgent call makes the point: Our political leaders aren't ambitious enough, tending toward "incremental proposals made up of small policies designed to avoid offending special interests," he said.

Some have already gotten the point. In Hawai'i, billionaire developer David Murdock urged the governor to declare a "state of emergency," and asked regulators to fast-track his 300-400 megawatt wind farm on Lana'i, which could meet up to 20 percent of O'ahu's energy needs.

Another billionaire, T. Boone Pickens, plans to build a giant 4,000-megawatt wind farm in the Texas panhandle. The oilman imagines wind turbines from Texas to North Dakota, providing 20 percent of the country's electricity.

These projects are part of a rapid rise in clean-energy investments worldwide: $117.2 billion last year, up 35 percent from 2006. Smart investors know which way the wind is blowing. Politicians should know too, and act accordingly.