>some $6.7 trillion was spent on alt-energy globally between 2004 and 2022, with the vast majority of that, some $4.8 trillion spent on renewables. And the vast majority of that $4.8 trillion — about $4.1 trillion — was spent on wind and solar.<p>This is an interesting stat, but I think it's misleading - the vast majority of cost for solar/wind is <i>upfront</i>, so it will naturally <i>appear</i> more expensive in the short term even if it's cheaper overall. Also, obviously, there was far more invested into solar in 2019 than there was in 2006.<p>I agree that the energy transition isn't (and obviously the Biden administration wants to pretend otherwise, because "we're solving climate change" is just great politics), but I want to attack some of the implicit assumptions why:<p>First up, the problem isn't renewables being too expensive, it's that <i>they're too cheap and competitive</i>. If you expect the price of future goods in a market to drop like a rock, why on earth would you want to <i>enter</i> that market, let alone commit significant investment into <i>today's</i> goods? Companies care about being <i>profitable</i>, not about being cheap. And as a quick aside, <i>of course</i> more is invested into the tech that currently holds 90% of the market.<p>Second up, reliability doesn't matter <i>yet</i> - if your electricity sources are 50% gas and 50% renewables, then you're just fine. Yes, when we get to the finish line this will be a big problem, but our deadline <i>is not dictated by time, but by emissions</i>. If we emit 100N emissions per year today and we reduce that down to 10N next year, then we have 10x longer before <i>man-made</i> emissions push us past whatever our goal is. As such, focusing on the last 10% is a terrible idea if it even slightly hinders our adoption for even the first 50%.<p>Third up, energy vs electricity is a double-bind. For example, switching to renewables alone won't stop ICE car emissions, but a <i>very</i> common criticism of electric cars is "why bother, the electricity is just coming from coal anyway". These two criticisms demand mutually exclusive sets of priorities, and if you pick one then people will hit you with the other.<p>The energy transition isn't, but we desperately need to discuss <i>why</i> instead of making assumptions.