Thanks for posting about this most important topic.
But the statement above makes no sense. Facts do not speak.
Facts are undeniable conclusions we draw from evidence and logic.
So what you have said here is still belief, and it is still not correct.
By the Science of Physics, we know all energy comes from the sun.
By our logic we know the sun powers all things in nature, with no exceptions, and with no returns, or demands for return.
How much of it we choose to put to direct use is up to us, now that we have the technology to do that.
Putting a little of it to use means we supplement fossil fuel energy consumption, perpetuating that.
Putting a lot of it to use means we replace fossil fuel energy consumption entirely.
Our existing economy is based on fossil fuel consumption, and again from Physics we know energy is interchangeable with labour, information, matter, and thus money, further proven by the markets.
Logically the sun has added all of those things to Earth continuously for all of its history, and logically we are extracting all of those things back out of the Earth when we use fossil fuels.
Logically it started out rich, but we are making it poorer.
Logically we are robbing the planet.
We can do that fast with no conservation, or we can do it slow, with conservation.
Either way, we are still robbing the planet as long as we do not take all of our energy direct from the sun.
Logically, planetary damage can only be stopped by replacing our use of Earth bound energy, with energy direct from the sun.
Logically the sooner we do that, the sooner we remove our energy demand from the planet.
I hope you can see all of this is just simple logic, combined with some knowledge of basic physics.
We have to switch all of our energy demands to solar.
Assuming that you can, now maybe you can see that the fastest way to switch to solar, is to put as much of it as we can spare, towards implementation of more of it.
The key thing there is we need some to spare.
That means we have to produce lots of it, to have lots more.
When you see this, you realise we’ve had it wrong all along.
Survival is not a zero sum game of conservation, it is an infinitely increasing game of consumption, in a world where there is far more than we can ever consume, and it all comes from the sun.
It isn’t the consumption that is wrong, it is only that we take taking it from our planet, as we’ve had to do, until we had the technology to accept energy directly from the sun.
Now we have the technology and are just starting to use it.
Now the zero sum game is finished, we have a debt to pay, an energy debt, to our planet.
To pay that down most quickly is our aim.
Utilising the energy of the sun pays it back down.
So we need to maximise that use.
We need to dive deep into consuming it.
That simple logic is the opposite of your belief, I think.