The cyclical nature of economies means that at some point a sustained recovery will occur. And when it does, policymakers must bargain in good faith and create a durable energy policy in which utility planners can bank. The capital markets will then loosen, allowing bankers, bondholders and investors to finance projects and bring the generation and transmission systems up-to-date.

"The uncertainties have been and will continue to be there for a while," says Lucas Torres, a partner with Akin Gump in New York who specializes in utility finance. "We need clarity. Each of the actors - developers, owners, investors and consumers - is trying to deal with the unknowns on their own level. Until we have some definitive legislation on carbon, for example, you can't reliably price the cost of building out new generation and how, in particular, a new gas plant would compare with a new nuclear plant."

Torres, who is joining a panel hosted by Energy Central on October 21 called Thriving Financially amid Turmoil, adds that a more transparent national energy policy will get ironed out. Carbon constraints will favor "non-coal" fuels and specifically nuclear and renewables, he says, adding that a rise in demand - and the accompanying generation requirements -- will also mean more transmission gets built.

At present, the country has about 900,000 megawatts of generation. Another 150,000 megawatts is projected over the next two decades.

It is also estimated that at least 200,000 megawatts of the existing fleet is older, requiring utilities to either replace the aging units or to retrofit them. With some of the newer laws that require modern pollution control equipment on the coal-fired facilities, many will opt to build instead natural gas, renewables and nuclear plants. Others, though, will pursue supercritical and ultra-supercritical clean coal plants.

To accommodate the expected future growth of electricity, utilities will be building out their transmission network by 8.8 percent, or 14,500 new circuit miles, says the North American Reliability Corp. A healthy share of that is expected to carry wind and solar electrons.

The lack of a coherent national energy policy is a function of legitimate policy differences. Generally speaking, one side says that the focus should remain on those fuel sources that are able to work around the clock and that utilities will employ newer, cleaner technologies as they become available. That would bode well for coal and the promise of carbon capture and sequestration.

Driving Expansion

The other side says that such strategies are short-sighted and that the nation must move beyond fossil fuels. Greener sources are the ultimate answer, they suggest, although some are saying that natural gas is the proper bridge fuel until those renewables mature. Others, meanwhile, are emphasizing carbon-free nuclear power.

"Without electricity, the country will see it is doomed, says Ed Tirello, senior power strategist for Berenson in New York. "So the heavy base-load nuclear will come in, along with coal with some carbon capture and sequestration. Then will we start another trillion dollar generation program and the money will from where it always has: Wall Street."

Tirello, who is also appearing on the Energy Central panel, goes on to say that the green sector is particularly affected by stop-and-go energy policies, even if it has benefited from favorable tax treatment. Those "breaks" are needed for now, he adds, but does say that over time the price of wind and solar will drop and market forces will take hold.

Tirello insists that it still comes down to the formulation of a national energy policy, saying that until such laws are firmly grounded investors in either green or conventional projects will remain cautious. And that uncertainty then spreads to the states, which must decide if capital projects are prudent and whether to allow utilities to pass through the cost of them - a scenario hastened by the lack of regular rate reviews.

Regardless of how public policy plays out, the fundamental building blocks to build an energy future are in place: The demand for energy will rise as global economies produce more goods and services and the world requires cleaner and more abundant fuels.

To that end, Harry Rady, portfolio manager for Rady Asset Management in San Diego, says that the need for energy is so great that each fuel source now available will continue to have its place. But in his mind, two fuels stand out: natural gas and nuclear, largely because of improving technologies, increasing supply levels and fewer emissions.

He portrays clean coal as "trying to put a square peg in a round hole" while describing renewables as "complimentary." Every energy source, though, will make a contribution, he notes, adding that the Southeast is more receptive to coal and nuclear construction while the western states are subsidizing their green energy programs.

Until the first few cutting edge projects get built - whether they are coal, nuclear or wind and solar - government subsidies will be necessary. But investors are coming in from the sidelines, adds Rady, especially because they can now buy valuable assets on the cheap. Investors, for example, can purchase some nuclear facilities at 50 cents on the dollar.

"The market will eventually drive the expansion," says Rady, who will also appear on the Energy Central panel. "Those projects that have an attractive cost-benefit equation will just fall into place. The market will reward them and provide capital."