I think the CO2 emissions thing is always overstated. Burning fossil fuels simply adds to a cycle that already exists, and 95% of CO2 emissions are natural. I don't believe that a mere 5% can cause huge detriment, especially since more CO2 = more plants=more photosynthesis=CO2 levels back to 'normal' - Nature will maintain a balance no matter what we do, unless we pork it royally.
'Renewable' sources all leach energy directly from the atmosphere / sea / rivers / sun, and as such could have dire, direct and rapid consequences if used on the scale required to meet current energy needs.
'Bio' fuels are difficult to produce in large enough quantities, and burn less efficiently, making them MORE polluting. The only advantage to them is we wouldn't need to give a sh1t about the middle east anymore (not a bad thing), but any environmental argument in their favour is flawed. The 'pro' arguments are all political, IMHO.
16B