I wasn't purposely attacking anything or anybody personally. My apologies when it comes across that way. I was addressing the facts that the typical reader would not know or think of asking about. And thank you, I do try to be entertaining if and when possible. I also do stage theater. Big Chief in Peter Pan, the pantomime was the latest.
Unlike most on this site and unlike 99.99999999999999% of the green advocates in the media. I work in the power generation industry and understand firsthand what is practical and what is not. There is what sounds good for an ideal clean world and what works on Star Trek or the promises made on a 30 second greenie interview. Some of these greenies make a good living making promises. Then there is the harsh reality of the real world . Limited sun, unreliable wind, the need for backup power, clouds, I2R losses and $$$ energy storage with low energy density.
If a system can not operate without subsidies then it is not practical.
Some folk are not familiar with the schemes for solar PV across all time zones in the US south and wind turbines everywhere. Then transmit the PV & wind electricity to the north west in the morning and the north east in the evening ? Hence 2500+ mile transmission lines . Even with DC the cost and losses would be prohibitive.
About the best we can do is the next generation molton salt or PHWR reactors to use low grade fuel and Thorium for base load power. Hydro electric provides some limited peaking capacity. Fossial to load follow the peaks. Wind and solar fine, but they get paid the same wholesale grid rate as everybody else.
Wind and solar is actually a worthwhile addition to small isolated electrical grids without baseload power. That primarily generate with imported diesel fuel in turbo diesels and gas turbines. Where wholesale electrical prices are 20+ US cents per Kw/hr. Hawaii and maybe Alaska for a developed country.Small undeveloped countries glad to have some power at any time. Haiti comes to mind as just one.
You may work in the power generation industry, but you don't know much about it. Government subsidies pay off big in the long run. Much of my power comes from the BPA. There was substantial opposition to the expense when they were building all those dams on the Columbia, but now they run power 2500 miles to SoCal. The West Coast is pretty well interconnected, but there isn't much capacity heading east. I believe there is a comparable large hydro project on the Mississippi called the TVA.
Distributed alternative energy sources are more stable than localized alternative sources. If the wind isn't blowing in Oklahoma it will be blowing in Washington. You don't have to ship the power 2500 miles, because there is both load and generating capacity distributed along the grid. Sending power from Stateline to Denver means you don't have to send power from Blue Canyon to Denver. Almost all utilities subsidize conservation because if you can conserve 500 mw that's 500 mw of generating capacity you don't have to build and operate. The US is phasing out incandescent lighting for exactly that reason, and has mandated energy star appliances.
We have certainly not reached the end of R&D on electricity storage. You may dismiss solid state capacitors as vaporware, but the Chinese are running a demonstration electric bus system using them. Unlike batteries, solid state capacitors don't wear out and can be charged in seconds rather than hours. The Chinese buses charge in 15 seconds at bus stops.
The most likely system for providing base load power in the future is geothermal. Almost all parts of North America have adequate radioactive material in the rocks to provide the heat, and the new drilling and fracking technology pioneered by the petro industry should make it accessible. Right now natural gas is cheap, so there is no incentive to develop another fuel free energy source, but natural gas won't last forever.
