Gov. Gary Herbert has appointed a 14-member task force to write a 10-year energy plan for Utah. Good idea. But some of the governor's stated assumptions when he announced formation of the group were both contradictory and unrealistic.

We understand that there are political reasons for some of the governor's rhetorical schizophrenia, namely, the climate-change deniers and free-market ideologues in his own party. Still, the task force should be given a mandate that is broad enough to follow where changing economic and technical conditions lead. Otherwise, it's a waste of time.

He said that he wants to follow a free-market model, avoiding government incentives and mandates. He wants to steer clear of considering atmospheric emissions and climate when formulating policy, although he does believe consumers want clean energy and clean air.

First, the free-market model. Most electric power and natural gas in this state are provided by government-regulated or municipal utilities, all of which are granted monopolies. Though some of the largest are privately owned, the free market has limited application.

The governor said the task force will consider nuclear energy and related issues such as waste disposal and water availability. Fine. But the primary reason to consider nuclear power is environmental. It does not produce emissions that foul the air or greenhouse gases that contribute to human-caused climate change. All nuclear power is heavily subsidized and regulated by government. If free market conditions were the only criteria, Utah utilities would continue to generate electricity by burning coal, the cheapest fuel. But the impacts on air quality and global warming are no longer acceptable, barring some breakthroughs in coal combustion and carbon-sequestration technologies.

Of course, nuclear power has its own environmental problems, primarily its demands for huge quantities of water, which arid Utah lacks, and a place to dispose of high-level nuclear wastes, which the entire nation lacks.

Herbert also seemed to denigrate renewable energy sources, saying that "the private sector will build a better mousetrap" and "that solves the nation's energy crisis a lot more than giving incentives to a few folk who have [solar] panels on their roofs." Why foreclose any portion of the energy portfolio in advance, especially in a state with abundant solar resources?

Finally, he expects the task force will finish its work by November. A five-month deadline suggests a foregone conclusion. So do the governor's constraints.