Renewables aren't affordable
The IPCC wants the world to switch to renewable energy and forgo abundant, affordable fossil fuel options:
…the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a thousand-page report on the future of renewable energy, which it defined as solar, hydro, wind, tidal, wave, geothermal and biomass. These energy sources, said the IPCC, generate about 13.8% of our energy and, if encouraged to grow, could eventually displace most fossil fuel use.
The linked article goes on to expose some very flawed thinking about what constitutes ‘renewable’ energy, but hey, let's just ignore that for a moment. Let’s pretend that renewables could replace 87% of the energy currently supplied by natural gas, oil and coal. What would that cost global economies, do you think?
Quick answer, far too much:
Solar and wind are heavily subsidized and provide poor efficiency returns on investment. A world powered exclusively by the most expensive energy production options the cost of everything would go up, jobs would disappear and civilized life as we know it would change radically. It wouldn't be easy, and it would be going backward, not forward.
Hippies are bullies. Their way or 'no way, man'. No nuclear, no coal - what's their end game?
Tune out and Turn off and Become... Amish?