Yes, but you haven't addressed my point. I asked how an underdiscussion of a point is "simple physics". The problem itself is simple physics, but the underdiscussion isn't - that's a societal issue. And it's also an underdiscussion thay applies to every form of energy.
I don't think anyone really understands what you're trying to say here. You're addressing two "weird claims" in the article. What are those two weird claims?
Comments
“The volume of fossil fuels we mine today dwarfs the amount of clean energy minerals the world will need in the future.”