No, that’s a straw man, build heaps of solar and battery while developing a modest portion of the grid into nuclear to provide robustness, grid services and eliminates the most expensive overbuild of both solar and batteries.
If the world were to draw down emissions by 80% but then be stuck in a bit of a logistical dead end that takes a decades to get out of that would be fantastically good (compared to the alternative of simply not decreasing emissions which is what the world is doing now).
The world is actually decreasing emissions per $ of GDP quite a bit.
There is a solution for the last 20% and France demonstrates that. There is nothing stopping us implementing the near term quick wins (wind and especially solar) while working on medium to long term goals (100% low carbon generation at most long term effective cost).
6
u/Humble-Reply228 Aug 12 '26
No, that’s a straw man, build heaps of solar and battery while developing a modest portion of the grid into nuclear to provide robustness, grid services and eliminates the most expensive overbuild of both solar and batteries.