Solar Power is the future not wind or being oil dependent

Apparently not.Though I really need not put forth much in the way of an argument supporting my position, as you have already, for the most part, though none too coherently, done so, I shall provide a little bit more of a case, as if you actually were playing the role of the Con.Perhaps one of the most common arguments given against solar power, and in favour of petrol, is that solar power is weaker than burning hydrocarbons, and that switching to completely electric fuel would be detrimental to the economy. However, these arguments are not valid, and are merely slanted in such a direction as to keep the world dependent upon large oil corporations, and because humans are generally afraid of progress.Now, there are also significant environmental concerns, from burning hydrocarbons, to the atmosphere, and thus the biosphere. Normally, the planet's carbon should remain in its crust and biosphere. When, as carbon dioxide, it is released from burning hydrocarbons into the atmosphere, it can cause an unbalance in the planet's natural atmospheric balance. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, meaning that it traps heat in the form of infrared radiation inside the atmosphere, maintaining a level of warmth necessary for life. Were there too few greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, it would be significantly colder. However, the burning of petrol, coal, and other compounds rich in CO2, releases unnatural amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, causing Global Warming. Too much global warming eventually leads to a cascading climate change, that cannot be prevented, Runaway Greenhouse Effect. This would destroy our ecosystem beyond repair, and cause the largest extinction Earth has even known: total extinction. This is obviously not a favorable occurrence.There would be no significant economic damage, if the world were to take itself off of hydrocarbon fuel sources, except for countries whose only major export is natural oil, particularly in the Middle East. Germany has already proved that solar energy can be just as efficient as any other energy we have yet devised, in fact, more so even than nuclear energy. The Middle East could easily accumulate solar energy to make up for the lost economic staple, natural oils. In fact, it could become a world energy producer by that. Thus, the economy could flourish on solar energy.One of the large qualms that has been raised, particularly by America, is that the loss of petrol would be multiple nails in the coffin of the automobile industry. While I do not personally think that is such a bad thing, I understand that much of America's economy has been based on automobiles, and they certainly are the primary transportation there. I thus acknowledge that solar energy could also provide the fuel for automobiles. No, not solar panels mounted on the roofs of cars. That would be impractical and tacky. However, Nikola Tesla devised a way of wirelessly delivering electricity from one point to another. Solar power plants could collect energy, by either photovoltaics or some other method, then deliver it to cars through wireless energy transfer coils planted in the roads. This would solve the common complaint that electric cars are not as energy efficient. It has been shown that they are practical in every other way. In fact, in the early 90s, General Motors built a number of prototype electric cars, which were test-driven and found to be highly useful, but recalled and destroyed, because of the possible economic repercussions to the rest of the American auto industry.Sources:http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...