From the same eco-geek class of folks that brought us ethanol (which uses more petroleum to produce than it attempts to replace) and the Energy Star Rating (which we now know is accurate approximately 60% of the time), comes the next big idea that is sure to save the planet: it's called metal oxide glaze. The California Air Resources Board (CARB), which predates the nation's own Environmental Protection Agency, has proposed a new set of mandates for all cars sold in California beginning in 2012.

The proposed mandate will require that a specialized metal oxide glaze be applied on the glass in cars as a means of cooling the interior car cabin by reflecting the sun's heat. Referred to as "Cool Cars," the plan is intended to reduce fuel consumption by reducing the need for air conditioning (didn't we try this in the 70's?) Maybe instead of Jimmy Carter suggesting we wear a cardigan on cold evenings, we should suggest people wear tank tops in the summer while driving. Didn't California at one time propose a ban on black cars for the same reason? Nah--that would be too "out there" for progressive, business savvy California!

On a serious note, the immediate concern for many, and indeed the reason this idea was scrapped altogether by Toyota in the 80's, is due to the electromagnetic and radio interference that the metal oxide glazing can cause with electronic devices. In the 1980's the technology was abandoned because it interfered with radio signals, garage door openers and those oh-so-few-drivers that owned a mobile phone back then.

In today's metro-busy climate we are awash with electronic gadgets, such as cell phones, GPS devices, laptop computers and electronic planners that are wi-fi ready at all times. Certainly there would be a collective effect of thousands of cars on the road reflecting signals between aircraft, emergency responders and satellite systems. What would be the impact of metal reflectors on our massive transportation and electronic infrastructure? I haven't seen much information analyzing these variables yet, but some have been suggested that the CARB explore other technologies that would reflect sunlight, but without the metal interference or the menace of communications disruptions.

Then, let's not forget the burden of cost for car manufacturers, already struggling with a severe economic downturn that doesn't look to be turning anytime soon. Will the Obama administration try to include this technology requirement in the dreaded cap-and-tax legislation that Sen. Boxer is attempting to rush into law out of allegiance to the United Nations' deadline? Is it possible that the makers, creators, manufacturers of this metal oxide glaze are trying to cash in on this kind of deal, giving them a gravy train of business for years to come?

I'm still having a hard time accepting why massive amounts of taxpayer dollars are dedicated to this phantom menace called "global climate change," formerly known as "global warming," until even the most religious of eco-geeks had to face the fact that the globe is cooling. There have been countless challenges to the theory and still we have to keep vigil on these hair-brained schemes that the left continues to float by us, hoping we're distracted by our tea parties and gun shows.

Let's face it, global warming is, at most, a barely viable theory; a cult-like religion at the very least. Our best chance to de-program it's followers is to stay on the ball. The CARB will be hearing public comments until it makes it's final decision about the metal oxide, "cool cars" mandates by the end of the month (a few days away)!

Let them hear from you! "Cool cars" are anything but cool.