Pointless in what sense? The very reason I'd like to see it updated is to see whether the conclusions change materially when we take into account technological

Pointless in what sense? The very reason I'd like to see it updated is to see whether the conclusions change materially when we take into account technological progress. As far as I understand it, whilst costs may be substantially lower that he envisaged, MacKay argued there are fundamental physical constraints on solar and wind that mean they still are unlikely to be able to provide all our energy needs (in the UK at least, without piping in energy from e.g. the Moroccan desert a la Xlinks). (Yes, I realise solar can do an awful lot if you're willing to 'go big' and have huge batteries. https://www.robinlinacre.com/fill_country_solar/ https://www.robinlinacre.com/fill_country_solar/)