When Denver officials recently announced they would launch a bike-sharing program this summer, they cited the Parisian experience as an example of what we could expect if the startup succeeded.

Well, let's hope not. The program in Paris is in utter disarray. Even the president of the company that runs it has publicly declared the scheme a failure.

As BBC News explains, "Over half the original fleet of 15,000 specially made bicycles have disappeared, presumed stolen," while thousands more have been vandalized. "Hung from lamp posts, dumped in the River Seine, torched and broken into pieces, maintaining the network is proving expensive," the BBC says. "Some have turned up in Eastern Europe and Africa, according to press reports."

When I mentioned the article to Parry Burnap, the director of the bike initiative, she said she'd "read the same report and we're looking into it further." But Burnap is confident that Denver can craft a program that avoids the sort of theft and abuse plaguing Paris. And she's probably right.

It's no surprise that people treat public or common property with less care and respect than their own - that's human nature - but thousands of businesses successfully rent all manner of merchandise without half of it being stolen and much of the rest trashed. The trick is to secure a sizeable deposit or a credit card number so that renters can be charged if they fail to return. Are Parisians simply immune to such deterrents?

Like Paris, Denver plans to provide bikes at stations scattered around the city (although in Denver's case, mostly near or in downtown and, with 500 bikes, on a much smaller scale). You'll be able to sign up for an annual membership to use the bikes regularly or swipe a credit card and sign an Internet waiver for a single ride. Burnap says the first half-hour will probably be free (also similar to Paris) and that modest but escalating charges will then kick in in order to promote the bikes' short-term use.

I'd probably be railing against Denver's bike-sharing plans if they involved tax revenue; public funding for bike paths is certainly justified but not for the bikes themselves. Fortunately, Denver will rely on sponsor donations and create a nonprofit to run the program. So what's not to like about the potential for an attractive amenity for tourists and local residents alike?

Not that I buy into the green dream that bikes will someday become the daily transportation of choice for a significant number of citizens in a low-density city that experiences cold, snow and short winter days - let alone in a culture where time is at a premium for so many of us. Support Denver's bike-sharing plans because they'll make the city more interesting, accessible and fun, not because they'll save the planet.

Sunny outlook?

Given all the oohing and ahhing over the solar panels at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science during Tuesday's presidential appearance there, we might want to remember that they produce only 3 percent to 5 percent of the museum's power. That's a start, but not a terribly impressive one.

During his remarks at the museum, Barack Obama promised that the stimulus package would help double the amount of renewable energy produced in the United States in the next three years. That's not bad, either - if true. But of course renewable energy starts from a very low base despite massive subsidies during the past decade.

Even Gov. Bill Ritter, who never ceases to chirp about the wonders of the New Energy Economy, knows that more than mega-subsidies and bold talk will be required to reach his New Energy promised land. Indeed, his own Climate Action Plan of 2007 admitted that its ambitious goals depend on technology that hasn't been invented.

In a revealing interview recently with The New York Times, Obama's energy secretary, the physicist and Nobel-winner Steven Chu, cited some of the needed inventions, warning that "a 'revolution' in science and technology would be required if the world is to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels . . ." He said solar technology will have "to get five times better than it is today," according to the Times, and that "Nobel-level breakthroughs" would also be required in electric batteries and the "development of new crops that can be turned into fuel."

So ooh and ahh all you like, but let's not idle down those coal- fired plants just yet.

Vincent Carroll is editor of the editorial pages. Reach him at carrollv@RockyMountainNews.com.