Better to study the real science Chris, belief is for religion.

We understand some have a literary mind, & no amount of effort trying to enlighten them with chemistry, physics & math is ever going to get through to them. Hopefully for the SRs of this world, the lefties will finally admit it was all a mistake/scam, & will enlighten them of the facts, even if they still can't understand it all.

I agree Chris, we will replace fossil fuels with something, probably nuclear, sometime, but it will be nothing like the present tech. There are nor enough rare earth minerals on the planet top build enough of the current stuff to supply even Europe, let alone the entire world.

https://createdigital.org.au/this-innovation-could-make-wave-energy-a-viable-renewable-alternative/

Hasbeen, this article expresses hope in wave sources, which are available 90% of the time.

I think many sources of renewables will be needed.

https://www.intelligentliving.co/scotland-most-powerful-tidal-turbine/

the above example of British wave technology would service 2000 homes, but also could harm whales and dolphins

Wind does not offer the same regular energy as tidal which should replace unsightly wind blades.

>Better to study the real science Chris, belief is for religion.
I urge you to do likewise, Hasbeen, because at the moment you're acting very much like a Creationist: you think you have information which invalidates what the real scientists are all saying, but you don't put it to the test. You never ask them about the flaws in your supposed proof; instead you moronically assume it to be perfect because it fits your political narrative.

And then you fabricate ridiculous claims about there not being enough rare earths on the planet (when in reality they're neither as rare as the name suggests nor even essential for renewable energy technology. Don't get me wrong, they are very useful (especially neodymium) but there are alternatives, and whether to use them is a commercial decision.

Then you make more bogus claims about "struggling simply to keep the lights on” when in reality the reliability has dramatically improved. And you repeat the highly illogical claim that windmills and solar are incapable of powering a modern society (as if storage didn’t exist).

Why do you treat easily solvable problems as insurmountable obstacles?

Chris check out the few hundred millions worth of rusty iron & steel that was the Spanish attempt to harness wave power of the mighty Atlantic.

Sorry mate, but the last thing we need is dozens of little boutique systems generating at huge expense, Micky Mouse amounts of power from ever more subsidised systems.

We must go with the most economical power, which is probably coal right now, but could be some kind of nuclear, if just some of the huge waste of money spent on windmills was diverted to the real world to research nuclear options.