I think the cleaner the world, the better the world, and I'm a huge fan of the environment, but from a libertarian standpoint, I believe people should be able to use whatever energy source they choose, and not be forced to use technology that isn't even that efficient yet. Sorry.
I respect your transparency here, but you ought to weigh the pros and cons a little bit more. There is definitely such a thing as being too libertarian for libertarianism's sake. The economic damages (which do exist) from environmental regulations are virtually imperceptible for almost everyone, however the fewer people dying from cancer, the lower incidences of asthma, and the clean rivers and waters are a benefit to literally everyone. If there is a clear benefit to government regulation, I don't think you should throw out the idea just because it's not necessarily canonical with being a libertarian.
For instance, I am obviously pretty liberal. But if someone proposed a market-based solution for climate change, I would not immediately disregard it just because it doesn't involve government regulation. I'd weigh the pros and cons and see if it's worth doing, even if it doesn't necessarily tow my party line.