Scotland temporarily ran entirely on wind power as turbines generated over 200 percent of national electricity demand.

[AZJonnie]

15. Yes I've read many dozens of NNadir's posts over the years, you don't have to get me up to speed

Actually, also a lot of yours on his threads as well , and I don't necessarily disagree with the premises either of you espouse.

But I had a very specific, focused question, one based on a simple "critical thinking" process. If you can answer that specific question, I'd be much obliged. To reiterate, I'm not sure it's logically valid to see that the CO2 numbers continue to rise despite the deployment of some small % of renewables and conclude "therefore, the whole premise of renewables being a helpful part of the mix is wrong-minded".

You'd need to know what this PPM number would be OTHERWISE (i.e. without such deployments) in order to assess whether said deployments were valueless, or perhaps even counter-productive.

Or are my critical-thinking faculties slipping away like so many others in my advancing years?

Also, IMHO, the underlying problem is 8B people, a high % of whom would love to live like a billionaire does. Which I think is, in part, a function of constant messaging and propaganda that tries to convince everyone that their "worth" is tied to "what they own". Or more specifically, "what they can buy"

IMHO, the whole world should've adopted China's erstwhile "1 child policy" about 50 years ago, along with a full-scale commitment to nuclear power. And I think about 1/2 the worlds population dying off is already baked in the cake, barring some miracle like fusion