Reasons for skepticism, reasons for optimism, and some tentative conclusions.
www.vox.com
"...Today’s models, at least, appear to agree that “a diversified mix of low-CO2 generation resources” add up to a more cost-effective path to deep decarbonization than 100% renewables. This is particularly true above 60% or 80% decarbonization, when the costs of the renewables-only option rise sharply.
Again, it’s all about balancing out VRE. The easiest way to do that is with fast, flexible natural gas plants, but you can’t get past around 60% decarbonization with a large fleet of gas plants running. Getting to 80% or beyond means closing or idling lots of those plants. So you need other balancing options."..."
Many say 100% is possible. I don't see it soon.
ie
en.wikipedia.org
"You don't know shit " is inaccurate and Blind partisan nonsense.
I Post ON TOPIC.
To the degree your post is I thank you.
But I will do my best to embarrass and put down one-line or Insult-only trolls due to the LACK of Moderation on USMB. (Home OF the RW trolls.. perhaps 70%)
`