More than 68% of New European Electricity Capacity Came From Wind and Solar in 2011

[kristopher]

37. No, it doesn't.

You are making another attempt to malign renewables by trying to insinuate they wont get us off of fossil fuels but frankly, I'm still waiting for you to explain how we transition to a noncarbon economy. You are real long on sniping and whining and real short on constructive discussion about how we can do what it is we need to do.

To deal with your claim, there are several points to remember:
1) Fracking is relatively new and it isn't needed to meet the needs we might have during a transition. We've been expecting the role of natural gas for well over a decade, and fracking only got rolling with Cheney's support in 2005. The NG price volatility pre-fracking, in fact, was a strong driver for renewable deployment.

2) The generating infrastructure for natural gas is already in place and largely paid for. All investment can go towards renewable generation and energy efficiency improvements that will shut down coal.

3) We have a number of noncarbon alternatives to natural gas in a renewable grid. Various forms of storage, biomass, liquid biofuels, several forms of hydro, and biomethane are all suitable for meeting the operational role that natural gas would play in a distributed renewable grid.

4) Nuclear also requires natural gas spinning reserves - far more than renewables would. However, if we invest in nuclear we are, as already shown, investing in technology that perpetuates the system that feeds the economic slot filled by coal. I have yet to hear any realistic mechanism where more nuclear gives coal an economic incentive to shut down. Why don't you explain how that might work?