I think you're missing the point that Kos is like here. The editors didn't 'select' this article from somewhere. Rather, people are free to create and post their own opinion. This doesn't mean it represents the editorial opinion of the publication's owner.
It's up to you, and that commenter you cited, to decide if the article improves your understanding of some issue. It's a place for discussion, the articles (most) not written by the staff are nothing more than the opinion of an individual.
Another aspect of articles posted on Kos is in many cases, the comments responding to the article are more knowledgeable than the initial article. Kinda like the threads here. And they have to be read before you have the whole picture. It's not rare for commenters to pile on and declare the original article is nonsense. Like occasionally happens here. (The Kos comments are generally favorable in this instance).
Here's another article on the subject I saw previously. Like this article, I have no idea of its credibility. But the subject in general, that renewables and now batteries, offer a lower cost of adding generating capacity, seems to me to be a subject that I thought others might find interesting.
California doesn't have any more sites suitable for hydro so the subject of where to find added capacity is a current issue. I hope the quoted Stanford professor is correct that this is presently the best path forward.
Sorry if this concerned you.
California has hit 100% renewable energy before, but this is the first time the state has sustained that success over an extended period.
www.thecooldown.com
