Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gaye Symington set up the debate with her simple proposal to drive the use of wind power in Vermont from 0.2 percent to 20 percent in 10 years. A far-fetched goal that's just too simple to realize?

The response was swift from David O'Brien, the state Public Service commissioner. He used one word to define Symington's idea: "irresponsible."

Symington's suggestion may in fact be "irresponsible." Yet we're all adult enough to probe probabilities of determining whether 225 wind turbines can provide what we need. Shouldn't we give the topic of energy all the time it deserves in the election campaign?

On forcing engagement with debate, Symington is being responsible. It is certainly responsible to delve into the tradeoffs the public is willing to accept in terms of height of turbines, mountaintop placement and the amount of energy that can actually be generated vs. the virtual standstill we now see with one simple answer that returns every time on how to supply energy: keep nuclear.

Keeping nuclear is at the top of the agenda because of reliability, and in fact it may be the real option Vermont has in maintaining relatively reasonable electric rates. Keeping nuclear and improving the energy-reliance portfolio via renewables, solar, wind, gas and hydro-power are a realistic scenario over time for utility providers who must deal with the reality of providing a consistently affordable supply.

Are we ready to go cold turkey without nuclear power if it means increasing electrical costs in a world where all energy prices are soaring? That is the question voters must answer. Science certainly must help us understand the pros and cons. Energy experts on the subject need to provide measurable guidance. But everyday Vermonters also should certainly participate in the political discussion, for at heart that's what this is.

To base most of our energy answers on one single energy provider on the Connecticut River or in Canada via water power is not necessarily the best energy policy. Nor is it sound energy policy to propose that Vermonters scrounge for scrap wood on state-owned property as a fall-back when home heating oil prices nearly double.

This is one of our own most pressing needs in this state. This is the time when bold ideas ought to be aired. David O'Brien may speak for Jim Douglas, but O'Brien is not running for governor.

Whether you agree or disagree with Gaye Symington, Democrat for governor, she's right about pushing the debate on energy to the edge.