There are two central themes to my above comment (and within the post itself although I do have a writing style of tossing in additional things to think about).

1) I would like your (or anyone else's) analysis of the above outlined current state of our national electric supply / distribution grid, the current reasonable estimated load 10 years out coupled with aging infrastructure, and how that stacks up to any current feasible alternative (renewable) generating technology.

I'm quite certain the alternative generating options are of such small production ratio to traditional as to render them one step short of non existent in terms of megawatts replacement value. The end conclusion might be the best and proven (only) option lays on the demand side.

Couple to that we just spent the last 10 years replacing the majority of AC & refrigeration infrastructure in our county in the phase out of old refrigerants to save the Ozone layer. These new system's capital expense was not only huge, but also the remaining life cycle of this new equipment extends quite a way into the future, so I see it as imprudent and unlikely to now turn around again and discuss replacing (again). I suspect most owners would also frown on replacing relatively new equipment at such an early period of the equipment's life cycle - so the AC load on the grid is still and likely will continue to be significant and growing.

2) A secondary analysis of the demographics of the current level of graduating engineers and scientists (toss in skilled trades training), the retiring baby boomer employees from technical industries, the likelihood of these two factors impacting our ability to functionally and efficiently keep the grid and secondary foundations of society such as potable water and wastewater, communication, transport systems, food supply all working properly, let alone any discussion of transforming them to a CO2 friendly alternative.

I think the comment you made above continues to speak optimistic (in hope) of vague unnamed practical solutions, but falls short on a case by case basis of offering technical solutions to the very real current challenges we face and that I offer for discussion.

The disturbing part of that is if we are not preparing students by education, or providing continuing training for the younger generations of adult workers that will follow the baby boomers. I'm concerned about just how we expect to not only maintain the current status quo, but also even begin to make sweeping changes and transform our basic energy and civil facilities hardware?

Given the US Government is functionally insolvent, additional discussion about either capital funding or tax incentives to pay for this transformation is also somewhat lacking in practical implementation.

I'm trying to encourage you or anyone else to offer practical and feasible solutions to the challenges we face. So far no one seems to offer otions to the overall conversation except that our continued CO2 output must be checked or we are doomed. I'm asking to explain how, in any practical way does anyone think this can be done?

My request is that these proposed options be laid out in detailed cost benefit form so we can all analyze them on their merits. The continued political and environmental lobby based propaganda always say we must do more, but usually offers nothing of substance what it is we CAN do.

A VERY GOOD question is why?