Yes http://issues.org/22-3/realnumbers-21/ would have been of some relevance...

...if Peter Lang wrote his post way back in 2003!

In response to the comments of Aidan and others, I think the ground rules of such debates need to be clear, as well as the numbers involved. Of course electricity can be generated using wind and sun. No-one argues that it cannot. Right now it’s pretty windy across southern Australia and the ‘renewables meter’ Aidan refers to is running at around 13% of total electrical power generation. That performance needs to be judged against the claims and aspirations of renewables supporters, which can be summarised in the slogan ‘100% renewable energy’. Today’s 13% figure is for electricity, not for total energy. To put that in context, only around 40% of Australia’s primary energy goes towards electricity. The other 60% is largely in gas for heating and industry and liquid fuels for transport. Personal transportation (cars etc.) can conceivably be electrified, but electrical versions of shipping, aircraft, heavy transport and heavy machinery are another matter. That holds for nuclear as well as renewables. We will need at least three times the quantity of electrical energy than now used. Without cheap, plentiful, continuous, intense sources of low-emission electrical energy it is highly unlikely that the basic purpose of any practical future energy plan, the mitigation of climate change, can ever be achieved. Indeed, it may well be impossible. Imagining that wind and sun can do the trick will lead to massive wastage and economic devastation.

Well said Tombee.

Wind and solar could earn their stripes if they got there because of tough emissions rules, not as a result of quotas and $80/Mwh LGCs. After all they might do reasonably since wind power is a partial saver for high priced gas while solar on the user's premises cuts out the middle man. However they should pay the fair standby costs for the rest of the system. That system fills the supply gaps and maintains a stable frequency and voltage.

The great white hope is Twh scale battery storage but there is precious little evidence that will happen. We're talking hundreds of millions of Powerwall type batteries. Then as pointed out we'll still have the needs of transport and heat for domestic and industrial customers. Hard to see a metal foundry (eg for electronic grade silicon) run on batteries. Time for a major rethink about where the money should go.

yep the rationalist again show how unrational they are. Many of them sit in Government offices not paying a cent for their heating/cooling and junkets flying around the globe. They then wack all this unnecessary costs for heating and cooling on pensioners and the poor through electricity bills. All this while sprouting their superior junk science knowledge. Disgraceful really when you look at the homes many of them live in but the high priests have managed to dumb down many of the young ones to make them think that by fighting so called man made gw they are doing something 'morally'worthwhile. Truth is that it is just a cover for a morally perverse generation.

//Personal transportation (cars etc.) can conceivably be electrified, but electrical versions of shipping, aircraft, heavy transport and heavy machinery are another matter. That holds for nuclear as well as renewables.//

Aren't some aircraft carriers and submarines fission powered? Surely it wouldn't be too hard to make that work for large ships.

And for what it's worth, I reckon you can have electric aircraft as long as they're airships rather than aeroplanes. Bring back the zeppelin!

Not so sure about terrestrial heavy transport. Maybe the internal combustion engine is the only practical choice there.