Agreed. It seems the author is falling into another shortsighted position after getting out of the previous one. > it’s time to be honest about all the costs a

Agreed. It seems the author is falling into another shortsighted position after getting out of the previous one. > it’s time to be honest about all the costs and benefits of every energy source is a good advice, but then you can't just say > Solar farms need 75 times more land to produce the same amount of energy. based on a study that compares the footprint of only the facility. To be honest about the costs, you have to compare the lifetime operating costs: the area lost to mining, the infrastructure to service the facilities, and to distribute the power (wind farms are farther out, pylons and roads are non-negligible land use). Another interesting observation is: > Trillionsof dollars were spent on wind and solar projects over the last 20 years, yet the world’s dependence on fossil fuels declined only 3 percentage points, from 87% to 84%. which suggests that either solar and wind didn't take off, or they did take off but increased our hunger for energy. The author fails to consider the latter by later advocating that energy must be affordable. In fact, making energy affordable is likely to exacerbate the problem, as it drives demand high.