This is good information, but I think it could be much better, if you were not a stakeholder in "Renewable" energy, you might see and highlight that there is a fundamental difference between solar energy and all others, which actually makes it the only one worth pursuing.
The energy we spend pursuing the others fixes nothing because they are a business of processing Energy already worked by nature, whereas solar is energy not yet worked by nature.
All of it comes from the sun in any case, but we should notice there is always a cost to nature of working energy put to use by it. In all cases, using any energy other than solar, there is a harmful effect to nature.
I won't go into too many details here, as there are a lot, but it might be enough to point out that the usual financial EROI evaluation does not take into account the energy put to use by nature in making the materials , wind, waves, or even volcanic, and planetary motion stores of energies, in other words the capital forms of energy, all created by nature independently of humanity.
In all cases, use of them undoes something nature created.
So if we were fairly accounting for that with a true EROI, we would find that the EROI in all cases except solar is negative; a net reduction of work done by nature.
Only solar would show a positive EROI, that is work done in addition to work done by nature.
The only non capital form of energy is solar, but to fully utilise it we have to change money, to begin reflecting non capital energy.
That involves putting an energy standard on money, and issuing it according to the Joules of energy received from the sun and put to use by humanity.
In other words, free money, issued to all people, reflecting the Joules of energy put to use by us, from the sun.
If we could do that, and recognise that is what we must do, everything would be fixed.
We might notice we do see this occasionally when free money is issued.
An indicative recent event was when oil prices went negative, and the value of the issued stimulus even went up, not down.
This makes sense if we realise that just for a short time, the first time, we actually monetised the free joules which had been received from the sun, since we had started to implement solar power for a number of years.
If we integrated (calculated) the total joules received and put to use from the sun up until that point, and monetised those, like we did with Bitcoin, we might have come up with the answer that the issue of 4Tn stimulus in the US in a single month was viable, in that it could be done without negatively affecting the value of the dollar, which is what we observed when it happened.
If we were to recognise this as the truth, then we should see the way out of the obvious hole we are in.
Start issuing limitless free money, towards implementation of the solar infrastructure needed, in a way that all humans are mobilised towards working in that capacity, and the problem is fixed.
All of the other forms of "Renewable" energy, carbon capture, and even carbon taxing, are a fixation upon which people become financially dependent in the absence of anything else, which perpetuates the harm being done.
That spell could be quickly broken by redirecting defence spending in all countries, towards this end.
It seems ridiculuous if we can't see how that works, but the reason we can't see it is just that it is so different from the way things are now, we are mostly resigned to doom.