I think a lot of the skepticism around solar/wind/storage rests on an incorrect understanding of how easily variability can be dealt with. Which is understandable, because it's quite a complex problem to model.

The story on that is surprisingly positive, but it's quite easy to FUD by parties with a vested interest (carbon lobby, nuclear lobby) because some people will hear:

* "well, the sun doesn't shine at night. the wind doesn't always blow! check mate!"

E.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37161473 (posted after I wrote this)

or, if it's aimed at a slightly higher intellectual level, things like:

* "pumped storage is a nice idea but realistically there just isn't enough space for all the pumped storage we need".

E.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37161790 (posted after I wrote this)

* "we need 1-2 weeks worth of storage to deal with the inherent instability of wind/solar"

And they'll believe it because it all sounds plausible enough, even though it's wrong.

And then they'll repeat it all over hacker news lol...