

Because batteries are a point of tension in the adoption of some electricity-centric techs. Electricity production can be done in many different ways already (unless you suddenly decide to 100x the demand for shit and giggles), but a lot of applications requires batteries, which makes them some sort of choke point for adoption. Making them better, more accessible, cheaper, more friendly on the environment ease that.
The comparison is also on one end of the world focusing on the dying down side of things, while the other end is (allegedly) looking forward.
That’s why they’re compared.


Yeah? That’s kinda the plan? Do you see a particular problem with a mostly renewable (to the scale of our species’ lifetime) source of energy, that can be implemented in various way to accommodate different situations, locations, and use, while trying to make things more efficient?
Because I don’t.