>I don't know how many times this needs to be said

Zero. Few people are unaware that the sun doesnt shine at night. It never needed repeating.

What theyre less educated about is that pumped storage, hydrogen, batteries, solar/wind anticorrelation and demand shaping are, together, more than capable of accomodating renewable intermittency.

What's most ridiculous is that even the most expensive form of viable power storage (hydrogen) is still cheaper when paired with solar or wind than nuclear power is alone. This isnt to say that we should go all in on hydrogen/solar, just that nuclear power's cost is unconscionably high.

Indeed, if it werent for the nuclear military's reliance on civilian supply chains and skills it would never get built and the 'environmentalist nuclear' PR offensive of the last ~8 years that resonated with so many people wouldnt have happened.

The energy sector is still private. If green were cheaper, and more reliable, and gave a good return, it would be getting a bigger investment. But it's not, because it's not. Maybe in theoretical-perfect-future-world it's cheaper, but not today.

This is because the producers are not paying (enough) for the waste they create.

Emissions or nuclear waste.

Seems like natural they would?

The growth of renewables is still on a nice exponential curve. We build solar literally add fast as we can scale production.

I work for an energy company that builds renewables. No we do not. I mean Jesus that's ridiculous. There's literally not capital for that, and the debt would be astronomical, to say nothing of legal, land access, problems with construction, contacts. But besides that there's different kinds of solar, and all kinds of specific issues with it, battery capacity being just one. Wind is a bigger opportunity and more commonly pursued, but has even more problems.

Making up shit just because you want it to be true isn't helping anybody.

Lack of capital is one of the limiting factors of scaling production...