That article starts by saying "Let's do the math", skips half of it, then pretends there was a conclusion. This is an opinion piece without an actual argument.

That article starts by saying "Let's do the math", skips half of it, then pretends there was a conclusion. This is an opinion piece without an actual argument. e.g. the article says that, to keep up with increased demand, we'd need to add twice as much wind energy yearly as China currently has installed. What the article neglected to mention is that China got to that point in less than 10 years from producing pretty much 0 wind energy - and with a mediocre effort at best. The world is very much capable of adding that much wind energy had we any reason to do so. Now I don't think we should go all renewables myself, but that article presents a weak ass, flawed, half-baked and incomplete argument at every turn. A proponent of a different opinion than that author would have no trouble completely ripping it apart and thereby discrediting his opponents. There will be no useful debate like this.