>This is one of the most blatantly pro-fossil, anti-renewable posts I have seen on HN.
Reality itself is pro-fossil. Fossil fuel is very damaging, but it's also an excellent, almost free, source of huge amounts of stored energy left for us to discover and use...
Solar/wind are much cleaner, but oversold.
If we got rid of fossils tonight, we'd be in the dark ages for decades (if not permanently). Even building solar/wind installations, at the moment, relies on fossil fuel infrastructure, plus the traditional grid required...
>First off, yes there is battery technology to bridge the gap.
Not at the scale requited to bridge the gap. "home-batteries for purchase for consumers" do their job because the demand and use is still very small...
>(...) so saying they're intermittent and fossil-fuel is not is false (...) Yes, we will be using natural gas for winter and certain Northerly regions for decades to come
Well, they are intermittent, and fossil fuel is not.
>Renewables absolutely do not need to be paired with natural gas to make it "remotely viable".
You just wrote: "we will be using natural gas for winter and certain Northerly regions for decades to come"...
Countries don't spend trillions on fossil fuels because "solar/wind is cheaper" and storage is "a solved problem", or because of some big conspiracy - they do it because it's not...
Reality itself is pro-fossil. Fossil fuel is very damaging, but it's also an excellent, almost free, source of huge amounts of stored energy left for us to discover and use...
Solar/wind are much cleaner, but oversold.
If we got rid of fossils tonight, we'd be in the dark ages for decades (if not permanently). Even building solar/wind installations, at the moment, relies on fossil fuel infrastructure, plus the traditional grid required...
>First off, yes there is battery technology to bridge the gap.
Not at the scale requited to bridge the gap. "home-batteries for purchase for consumers" do their job because the demand and use is still very small...
>(...) so saying they're intermittent and fossil-fuel is not is false (...) Yes, we will be using natural gas for winter and certain Northerly regions for decades to come
Well, they are intermittent, and fossil fuel is not.
>Renewables absolutely do not need to be paired with natural gas to make it "remotely viable".
You just wrote: "we will be using natural gas for winter and certain Northerly regions for decades to come"...
Countries don't spend trillions on fossil fuels because "solar/wind is cheaper" and storage is "a solved problem", or because of some big conspiracy - they do it because it's not...