California Gov. Jerry Brown made headlines this week by announcing plans to get half the state's electricity from renewables by 2030.
Brown (D) wanted the state to enforce a 50-percent drop in petroleum use by 2030 but was unsuccessful in that effort.
The plans are meant to combat what climate change, or global warming.
Skeptics argue that the warming of the earth is not real or models warning of climate catastrophe are wrong.
Bruce Thornton, research fellow at the California-based Hoover Institute, was asked if it was possible for California to get half of its electricity from renewables given efficiency and other issues facing those sources at the present time.
"It might be possible. It would be more expensive than you can imagine," he responds to OneNewsNow. "Remember, it's not just putting up the windmills or solar panels. It's getting electricity to the people, transmission lines, all that other infrastructure that has to be built."
Thornton also doubts there will be windmills visible from "pricy coastal property" in San Francisco, San Diego and other cities.
"That's another issue," he observes. "We love all this stuff but let's put it off someplace where we don't have to see it."
Thanks to the Kennedy family, there is some precedent for such hypocrisy on the East Coast.
Thornton is open to greater use of hydro-electricity, although he says people arguing for renewable energy do not want to build more dams and reservoirs.
"We have some of the highest energy prices in the United States. It's over 30 percent higher than the national average," he says. "Who does that fall on most heavily? It falls on the poor."
In fact, he adds, California ranks third in the U.S. for "energy poverty," meaning when poor people must use much of their income to pay their utility bills.