There are very obvious problems with renewable energy.

-rising electricity costs compared to other countries with an increase in renewables, despite the repeated claim that more renewable energy would reduce costs

-massive environmental destruction which goes largely unreported

-a total lack of published costings for the renewable energy transition

-the problem of financing non-dispatchable energy sources

-the massive public subsidies being paid to renewable energy companies

-the repeated claim that we have no time to waste to avoid the approaching catastrophe, a common pressure tactic of con artists

-the fact that nuclear power is a proven low carbon/low cost dispatchable energy source capable of being built over a very short time frame, as demonstrated by the French half a century ago. In contrast:

-No wind and solar powered dispatchable energy system has ever been built, and given the system cost one will likely never be built

I suspect that within a decade several industrial conglomerates will be pumping smrs off the production lines much like jet aircraft are today, marking the beginning of a new era of prosperity driven by cheap energy.

Fester,

These lists always look persuasive until you hold them up to light. Most of what you've listed is either misleading, outdated, or missing key context:

Rising electricity prices:
True - but driven mainly by gas price spikes, market failures, privatisation, and poor planning. Renewables are a scapegoat, not the cause. Countries with well-integrated renewables are now seeing price relief.

Environmental destruction:
Sure, wind and solar have impact - but they don’t pump mercury into the air, spill oil, or require endless fuel extraction. Coal and gas environmental damage makes wind farms look like gentle nudges.

“No costings” for the transition:
False. AEMO, CSIRO, and the IEA have published extensive costings and forecasts. If you haven’t seen them, that’s not because they don’t exist - it’s because you haven’t looked.

Non-dispatchable financing issues:
That’s why batteries, pumped hydro, and interconnectors exist - and are already being used. South Australia didn’t wait for a blog post to tell them what’s possible.

Renewables get public subsidies:
Yes - and fossil fuels have been subsidised for over a century. If subsidies make something a scam, coal beat everyone to it.

“No time to waste” is a con tactic:
Or it’s just the scientific consensus on climate risks. Urgency isn’t always marketing - sometimes it’s just a warning we’d rather not hear.

Nuclear is cheap, fast, and proven:
Not in this century. Current builds are expensive and slow. SMRs are still in development - not “rolling off production lines.” You’re not describing reality - you’re describing a hopeful brochure.

“No wind or solar dispatchable system exists”:
South Australia runs on high-renewable input with batteries and firming. It’s not theory - it’s already happening.

You’ve listed a bunch of confident claims. But confidence isn’t evidence, and suspicion isn’t an argument. If renewables were as hopeless as you say, they wouldn’t be outcompeting fossil fuels in the actual market.