Puzzles me why you think ranting makes your argument any more valid or convincing.

Or maybe you think it will intimidate folk into not thinking for themselves, who knows.

And now you’ve invested so much ranting in your argument, you’ll probably find it really difficult to admit sooner or later that you, and much of the scientific community, are dead wrong.

Our problem would be solved if nuclear power was the answer. It has been tried, many many times, and it has failed.

The answer is tied up in the misuse of the word renewable.

There is no renewable energy, only energy, and it comes from the sun.

Generation, when speaking of energy, is a poor word also.

When we derive energy from anywhere but the sun, we are converting energy capital, to live energy, which always has a cost in capital.

Earth is the capital.

Hence our zero-sum economy. It is all about converting capital to energy. Nuclear is no different.

Yet the sun radiates us with 1000 times more live energy, continuously, forever.

And it can be converted with cheap technology.

It might well need to be stored locally for times of little local sun, until a worldwide grid can be had, but that can be done with simple flywheel technology, batteries are never a necessity for that application.

I am not a polititian, or a scientist but a systems Engineer.

I can assure you it is a minor technical challenge to implement industrial scale solar power worldwide.

The real challenge is removing the profit driven blinkers from most people, that they don’t even know they are wearing, so that they might recognise the only way out.

By the worship of money as capital, we practice a grand energy Ponzi, then use ambiguous language to disguise it, all in the name of profit.