I've stumbled upon a substack article summarizes the need to invest more in nuclear energy and less in solar and wind energy. As much as I like solar and wind as sources for energy, their physical limitations are why I'm not fond of them.

Looking at the chart below, the author compiled the energy returned on investment (EROI) on each of the different sources of energy. In the chart, you'll find a line that says "rabbit", which symbolizes the standard amount of energy needed to obtain a resource, which will give you more energy. As long as you receive more energy from the thing you obtained than on the amount of energy spent obtaining it, you will survive. As you can see, solar, wind, and biomass barely breakeven when it comes to EROI. But for fossil fuels, hydro, and nuclear, the EROI is attractive. Hence, this explains why the global economy has skyrocketed in development since the discovery, development, and wide usage of fossil fuels.

Some may say that recycling can improve the EROI of solar energy however, recycling solar panels requires energy as well. The author goes deeper into it in his article.

If society wants to prepare itself for a more prosperous future, it needs to invest more in sources of energy that have higher EROI. And that's where nuclear energy comes in. Running LMMs comes with immense energy consumption. Powering electric vehicles comes with immense energy consumption. The future innovations will require more energy. With a growing population, there will be more demand for energy to provide basics like heating, lighting, and transportation.