[Carson Drayke]

Utilities sponsor thorough cost/return analysis before they ever build a plant. If it were economically viable over a 30 year life cycle for them to go more toward renewables, profits would push them to. Not to say it shouldn't be done, just that it takes a concerted goverment effort to push it, as the hike in electric bills, etc. that will come of it is not popular, and can only be offset by more money into extensive infrastructure, research, and development.

Renewables are not a panacea. The battery room to supply just the relatively small amount of power storage to get a plant up and running is massive, expensive, and very hazardous (bad combination of lots of acid and the potential for explosion). To extend that storage system to feed a city when wind/sun is not cutting it isn't just a matter of scale, a whole new system will need to be devised.

Nuclear is a nice option, but it takes 10-15 years to get a plant built and running, and nuclear fuel is not a renewable resource, aside from the obvious disposal problems.

I've seen statistics on the number of power plants of various types that would need to be built over the next 30 years to meet America's projected power needs and any combination is daunting. With the delays in the market while we try to sort it all out, we're going to be hurting in the future trying to catch up to demand any way we can.