YOU LOVE TO SEE IT: A Clean-Energy Future Might Not Be Far Away

I hope those researchers that found a way to break down PFAS chemicals are awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and win the Nobel Prize. They saved generations of people from slow poisoning. So much good news that I'm optimistic about the future after two years of meandering failure! I'm going to treasure these feelings today. Thank you Ricardo!

Listen, I know you guys are trying to just publish things on Saturday that are easy reads for your liberal audience, but your lead story is just a little too good to be true. It sounds like those stories you read about breakthroughs in fusion energy startups or some new solar cell technology that is going to revolutionize the industry. But none of it ends up playing out in real life. Which make me wonder, why, if 100% renewable energy were to pay for itself in 6 years, have Nordic countries like Germany, Sweden, Denmark, places which are arguable on the forefront of renewable energy development, places which are being threatened with Russian gas cutoffs, why have they not gone to 100% yet without the use of nuclear?
Probably because the reality of renewable energy is much different than what this small paper and activist author purport. Is renewable energy getting cheaper? Yes? Is the transition going to be cheap? No.
Perhaps for real information on we should consult the most recent IPCC report and their recommendations. I hope we could all agree that this is the gold standard for a pathway to a sustainable future and a necessary resource for how to tackle climate change. But it's sober assessments and recommendations would probably not make for good leading stories on the easy reading day. Can we at least try to be a little bit critical/skeptical of the articles that sound too good to be true?