It is good we see some dialog on the subject of “renewable” energy, but I wish we could stop calling it that, as it seems to confuse a little.
I think that term results from a tendency, even a desire in some humans, to think of energy as scarce.
But it isn’t.
It is all around us.
We just haven’t used it much directly from source.
The sun is the source, and it is infinite.
Furthermore the energy from it is donated to us for free.
When we monetise that energy, by Bitcoin, for example, we come to the conclusion that money is free.
That removes scarcity of money, and yet we see the same money going up in value.
So it isn’t actually scarcity which is valuable, it is abundance which is valuable.
Valuable, is what we decide we like as humans, via the markets.
Valuable, is what we direct some of our abundance towards.
So, when we dispense with the illusions that energy, or money are scarce, it doesn’t matter that some energy is “Wasted”, or some money is “Wasted”.
What matters is to expand the production of free energy, and free money, to cover all “inefficiencies”.
That means simply using some of the free money from free energy, to expand our use of free energy, to create more free money.
In other words, towards expansion of solar energy.
When we do that, all of the other things, including pollution are fixed.
Money, and time, put towards anything else is the thing that is truly wasted.
That seems to be what happens when we use confusing terminology, such as “renewable” to describe energy.
Energy is simply donated, from the sun, to all things in nature that use it.
There are no hoops, or loops of conversion or return. It is linearly, unidirectionally, donated, from the sun, to all things in nature.
Why should we care if some energy is “Wasted”, when the source of it is free?