I'm not having a go at you personally, most people who don't understand depression have your dismissive attitude. I suggest you try educating yourself on the subject because odds are you will encounter a loved one with depression at some point in your life and it's handy to know what to do after telling them to "cheer up" doesn't work.
As for TFA, I don't find it surprising that "start up" people have a high proportion of manic-depressives, the manic phase of the illness is characterized by extreme optimism.
Shameless plug for a good cause
Disclaimer: 56, turned down the boss's job a couple of years ago - been there, done that in my late 30's, learnt a lot but ultimately not worth the aggravation at my age. If you don't have a niche, you won''t get good money at any age, in any industry. People who have a marketable niche know what it is, if you are caught in a dying niche...well...maybe you should have been paying more attention earlier?
Not everyone believes that CO2 emitted by man is having any significant effect on the planet
Yep, and some people think vaccines cause autism, both groups are factually incorrect and were initially motivated by a morally warped version of financial self-interest. Piers Corbyn uses "secret methods" to scam money from people who are mathematically/scientifically illiterate, he claims to be able to predict earthquakes and the weather but his track record does not match his claims. That you fall for such obvious technobabble just betrays how little you know about human nature, science, and maths.
nuclear is a VERY good bridge between coal/oil/gas and "clean energy".
That was definitely true in 1980. In the 1990's we chose gas as the bridging tech (re: fracking boom), however we have now clearly crossed the gas bridge and arrived on the other side. The massive efficiency gap between generating electricity with FF vs renewables that existed in the 1980's no longer exists. Today the "smart money" is on renewables becoming cheaper than coal in the near future. Here in Australia it's already a "no-brainer" to put solar panels on a new home, and that's with a far-right government that is openly hostile to the renewable industry.
but we don't currently have any way to store it in a grid scale type of way
This is FUD spread by the coal industry, they are trying to make you believe "base load" does not need batteries. The truth is that coal and nuclear already have a network of giant batteries called "hydroelectric dams", that they recharge during off peak times when the plant is generating too much electricity. They need dams and gas fired turbines today because their output curve is flat whereas the demand curve of a city is not. In fact all forms of large scale generation need "batteries" for the simple fact that none of them have a supply curve that comes close to matching the demand curve, without fast switching "batteries" such as hydro a grid simply won't work.
Scale: Every coal plant in use today was built in my lifetime, many have been built and rebuilt. If someone had predicted/planned that rate of expansion back in 1960 people would have told them they were nuts. Solar and wind is cheaper than nuclear and in many places on par with coal, extrapolating the current trend in costs, renewables will be significantly cheaper than coal in the next 3-5yrs (coal itself is significantly cheaper than nukes). India is in the process of providing 400m people with electricity (and toilets), they are doing it with renewables because it is cheaper than importing coal from my country (Australia).
There's no economic or technical reason that the current coal infrastructure cannot be replaced with renewables in the next few decades, we don't need better battery tech to get it done, we don't huge subsidies, we don't need resources from hostile nations, and in most locations we don't need (expensive) nukes, we just need the political will to force the electricity industry to clean up it's act, legally define (and require) "clean energy", phase in the punishment for non-compliance in a predictable and achievable timetable then let the engineers within the energy companies sort out the practicalities of implementing it. I'm advocating regulatory "force" here because their 150yr track record of fighting reasonable environmental law strongly indicates they won't do it voluntarily.
Off course if you want to eliminate the grid altogether, then you will need better battery tech.