A reader wrote:

You said that wind and solar ” are not clean, green or sustainable”. I am surprised, they seem to be better than the alternatives. What is the reason they are not sustainable?

---

The short answer:

• The mining required will destroy and pollute ecosystems (and displace people from their homes, plus we can’t seem to mine without sending children in them, which I consider inhumane)
• Solar and wind require fossil fuels to manufacture, transport, install, and decommission
• They need to be replaced every 20 years, so their problems persist
• Their end-of-life materials pollute

The long answer is in articles like these:

• The Dark Side of Congo’s Cobalt Rush
• The Hard Math of Minerals by podcast guest Mark Mills.
• Why mining to make renewables will destroy the planet by Alice Friedemann

---

EDIT: More relevant articles:

• The Green Growth Delusion: What if the limits of renewable energy require sacrificing consumption? by Christopher Ketcham
• The Rising Chorus of Renewable Energy Skeptics by Andrew Nikiforuk

---

The most comprehensive answer I’ve found is the book

• Life After Fossil Fuels, by Alice Friedemann

I prefer them to fossil fuels, nuclear, and fusion, but only as part of a plan to phase them out too, which I described in my post

• Nuclear and renewables look like methadone

I should also note that some believe renewables can be renewable, as in

• A Path to Sustainable Energy by 2030 by podcast guest Mark Jacobson
• and his book 100% Clean, Renewable Energy and Storage for Everything

though I consider his results overly optimistic.

• ← Who should decide if public transit should be free? What the answer means for sustainability.
• 652: Carl Erik Fisher: The Urge: Our History of Addiction →