The idea of a 100% renewable energy future has become an article of faith for many, but when you look at the specifics of a plan like Mark Jacobson's, the scale of it is so absurdly implausible it just leaves you shaking your head.  And yes, we can look back on the history of successful innovations in technology, but don't forget about all the failed efforts as well.  A lot of people thought 'solar roadways' was a great idea but if you happen to know the first thing about either roads or solar panels, you can see at first glance that it's not going to work.  It's slightly less apparent that wind & solar aren't going to work as sustainable replacements for fossil fuels on a large scale, but with EROIs in the low single digits it's a pretty safe bet.

Critique of Jacobson's 100% WWS plan in PNAS last week:

http://reason.com/blog/2017/06/21/powering-us-using-100-percent-renewable