If you want to claim renewables are just as wasteful, you're going to need to substantiate it.That article also greatly underestimates inefficiencies in renewables. Also, cost matters as well, the article mentions that EVs are far more efficient than ICE but EVs without subsidies are completely unaffordable (at least just a few years ago, maybe they are legit affordable now but they also kill the used car market though).
* did have solutions, which we have already successfully put in place.Could've invested in infrastructure for a very well known technology vs an unknown one with issues that didn't have solutions.
Let's see where you're getting your information, please.Britain puts hidden taxes in the energy bill. Also, the renewables you built and paid for had to be turned of over half the time because you didn't have grid infrastructure to move the output. Putting all that money into renewables was a bad idea and very inefficient (since you like being efficient and all).
I have provided a source showing subsidies going to fossil fuels which massively outnumber any estimate for renewables.You've never shown that fossil fuel subsidies currently exceed renewables in the US. Even if my source is indeed massively underestimating fossil fuel subsidies, renewables could still easily be getting more subsidies.
And your response is just... speculation that renewables could be getting more.