> Being able to find a handful of hours It was the time I wrote the comment, but it looks like it was "an exceptional month", and "cherrypicked". Of course,

> Being able to find a handful of hours It was the time I wrote the comment, but it looks like it was "an exceptional month", and "cherrypicked". Of course, today is also cherry picked. You could take today, load factors of renewables are about 8%. Ah sorry, it's an exceptional month ? What about last year ? Well, solar load factor had even lower load factor than this month, with a load factor of 1.5% over the month of december. Wind energy was, opposingly, great and worked with a 50% load factor. The solution you proposed, 400GW of solar, would not have helped. > it proves you're using anything you can find to attack renewables and aren't remotely interested in truth. Arent you bored to take my argument, ignoring it, and repeating it back to me ? At least you could have proposed less stupid solution than 400GW of solar, like 400GW of wind energy, which at least produce useful output in winter. But that would mean you would be informed and we wouldn't had this sad looking discussion.