> Renewables wouldn’t have worked decades ago. Battery capacity was terrible, and wind and solar was extremely inefficient.

Yes they would have. It would have cost more to implement them without more R&D, but that wasn't the only choice. We could have invested heavily in R&D and gotten there much sooner. Despite the extra cost, it would still have been cheaper overall.

The thing people seem to not be getting from my posts is "overall." Big Picture. Total spend. Everything accounted for.

If you draw a circle around a piece of it, then yes, you can argue about costs. That's exactly why they do it.