You've heard about Al Gore's challenge to remodel the U.S. electrical industry in 10 years to eliminate all CO2 emissions. Some commentators say the job is too big, some say it isn't, but everyone, including Al, agrees it's a big, big job.

But exactly how big? What are we up against here? How much new wind, solar, geothermal power do we need to replace the CO2 producing plants? What else might be needed to make such a system work?

Say the word "Nano" in America, and most people will think of a music player; say the word in India, the world's largest democracy, and people there will likely think of a car. The music player is Apple's, the car is Tata's.

You might think comparing the products with each other -- just because they're both called Nano -- is like comparing Apples to tandoori chicken -- but after reading Scott Carney's eyewitness report on the car (in the current issue of Wired), it's time for a rethink. Both Nanos are measures of corporate vision and success. Which is of greater significance?

Tata's Nano is a $3000 car with a roomy interior that accommodates a family of four. For a 1300-pound car, it's got a powerful engine that gets 47 miles to the gallon. And Tata could sell 30 million of them in India alone. Huge markets in Africa and South America await as well.

When some survivor one day writes the history of this current era of global transition and recalibration, Apple's Nano will likely get nary a mention. It's a bauble, merely, a trinket. Tata's Nano, on the other hand, will come to own the word. The car and the concept it embodies is world-changing. It also redefines a coveted piece of the American dream and makes it available to everyone, with no emigration necessary. A final chapter of the outsourcing story.

If you don't believe me, listen to what Scott Carney had to say when he got to sit behind the wheel of Nano.

Barack Obama unveiled his energy plan in Lansing today, the capital of the state of Michigan, primary home of the US auto industry.

There are two elements in particular of Obama's energy plan that deserve special attention for the healing touch they apply: to combat vets returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, and to the ailing US auto industry.

And lord knows they -- and this nation -- need a healing touch.

It’s becoming increasingly clear that the American public has been had.

The Bush-Cheney administration has used China as its #1 excuse for not joining Kyoto and for all subsequent inaction on fighting global climate change. The world's top carbon polluter is not building a clean energy economy -- the US argument goes -- so why should we?

Now we can see how factually wrong that was, and how derelict. The Climate Group has released new data on China’s "Clean Revolution," and here's what the authors predict:

"In the move to a low carbon economy, we believe that China will no longer be a developing country following where others have led, but a pioneer leading the way."

Steve Howard, CEO, The Climate Group
Changhua Wu, Greater China Director, The Climate Group

The evidence, from the report:

Congestion pricing in New York City -- the scheme to charge a fee for driving your car into the Big Apple -- died a quiet death a few months ago. Strongly supported by Mayor Bloomberg, the idea was killed by state legislators, even though the federal government was willing to kick in $360 million to make it work.

Looks like the billionaire mayor might have been right about congestion pricing after all. The public transit system is in dire need of money, and now officials are thinking congestion pricing is the revenue source that can lead them out of enormous projected budget shortfalls.

The New York Times has an amusing story on the turn-about that includes mention of a counter-proposal for rescuing the subways and buses: a 1% increase in taxes on millionaires that would accomplish the same budgetary magic. Only in New York.

But this is no parochial story about the City That Never Sleeps alone. It's about every big city in America.