Interesting. And much different from IIRC what a recent episode of Nova[1] said. Nova claimed that our worldwide power needs would be 3x current by the end of the century.<p>No way we can get to that point on mostly renewable energy. The show visited a large battery installation in China. The installation was <i>huge</i> (many many acres) for IIRC 20 MWh. The batteries helped smooth the power output from a PV solar installation.<p>So batteries were great in that example, but I just can't see how they can replace a nuke plant for base load. How do you go from 20 MWh to replacing a nuke producing 1000 MW * 15 or more hours of low sunlight in winter? Just like in Jaws ("you're gonna need a bigger boat"), you're gonna need square miles and square miles and square miles of batteries.<p>And if it's not a nuke, then it's a big combined cycle natural gas plant. Or a coal plant. Something, anything, that can keep the lights on at night.<p>I think this Guardian article is nothing more than wishful thinking.<p>[1] <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/treasures-earth-power.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/treasures-earth-power.htm...</a>