UPDATE: Can energy keep the candidates' attention?

oil20rig20offshore2 Sunrise or sunset?

Sure, $4 gasoline got the presidential candidates’ attention.
And Congress’ efforts to pass energy legislation kept it on the burner for a little while longer.
But the decline in oil prices and the end of peak driving season threatened to lead us back toward the usual apathy politicians (and the public) feel toward wrestling with the most difficult beast.
Obama (and now Pelosi) is now willing to say “maybe” to offshore drilling. Both McCain and Obama met with T.Boone Pickens in recent days to talk alternative energy. And today McCain is going to be on an as-yet-unnamed Gulf of Mexico oil rig run by Chevron (sure that status will change shortly). (He went to the Genesis platform off Louisiana).
But then again, some don’t see this attention to energy as necessarily a good thing. As former Shell Oil CEO John Hofmeister said yesterday “The politicization of energy is only beneficial to those running for office,” leaving Americans listening to debate that rarely produces effective policy.
Here’s McCain’s energy policy, which is actually the first thing to pop up on his Web site. And here’s Obama’s energy policy, which is a bit harder to find on the site (although the top quote on the site is about energy). And while he’s not running for office, here’s Chron business columnist Loren Steffy’s energy plan.
Tell us what’s on your energy plan. It needs to be more than one idea. Give us at least three. Don’t want to write it here? Drop us an e-mail.

Further proof the candidates need to keep paying attention:

Voters are crying out for more solar and wind energy — but that doesn’t mean they are opposed to drilling for more oil at the same time, according to a Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll.
The poll’s findings suggest any political advantage Democrats or Republicans hope to get from the national debate over energy policy will depend on how skillfully they package their positions.