[cdnsteve]

Solar is not an economical or environment friendly mechanism to produce energy. This is a house of cards.

[gknapp]

What makes you say that? There's so much research that flies in the face of this sentiment. Solar on rooftops alone has the potential to supply a fourth of the current US energy consumption [1]. Other studies estimate that solar could grow to supply between 30-50% of our energy consumption in the future [2]. Solar represents a near limitless supply of energy, and can be harvested in a decentralized fashion (allowing homes to directly power themselves).

Furthermore, EVs have shown that advancements in tech can mitigate concerns around material availability and sustainability (while also increasing efficiency).

[1]: Rooftop Photovoltaic Technical Potential in the United States, https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1575064

[2]: The underestimated potential of solar energy to mitigate climate change, https://www.nature.com/articles/nenergy2017140

[jlmorton]

I'd invite you to review the US DOE Levelized Costs of New Generation [1], which includes both subsidized, and unsubsidized costs.

[1] https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_generation....

[fuddle]

"Solar is now the cheapest energy in history" - https://www.zmescience.com/science/solar-is-now-the-cheapest...

[admax88qqq]

Really? Most of the numbers I've seen suggest solar is the cheapest energy production there is, so it certainly seems economical.

[S201]

[citation needed]