We simply cannot currently generate enough renewable energy to cover all our energy needs, so if you are wasting power that could've been used for something more important, it's a waste regardless of the source of your energy.
The more energy society demands, the more likely it becomes that some of it is generated by coal. And does it really matter which electrons are used for what at the end of the day?
I agree that most arguments in this area resembles tribal war more than rational debate, much like any discussion involving either trump or musk, where rationality is also thrown out the window in favour of signalling tribal affiliation
It's rational to conclude the costs are not worth those supposed benefits.
Renewable energy production has externalities, same as everything else. The power production equipment has to be built, which needs materials. It has to be transported, which needs energy. It needs to be maintained and so on. Just saying "well, we can always add a few more renewable power plants, who cares?" would only be valid if we could produce them out of thin air.
>Energy consumption is frankly not a phenomenon I give two shits about, as an environmentalist.
Despite a few people specifically calling this sentence out as 'ridiculous' or whatever, I think this is a completely valid point. If 100% of the energy powering something comes from renewables, who gives a shit?