It's a perfect topic for the "middlebrow dismissal". Contributors can start from a true-but-myopic fact, that renewables are intermittent. They can then deploy their biases that "everyone else is stupid and hasn't thought about this", and/or "everyone with the opposite opinion is a paid shill", and get very exercised about it.

Global warming attracts a certain kind of "gotcha" nerd who will hunt for the one set of data that can be arranged to make it look not so bad while ignoring all the evidence on the other side of the scale. There's an entire site devoted to that (WUWT).

Meanwhile there's a set of quietly competent engineers keeping the lights on and ignoring all this social media nonsense.

yeah they're attaching Bloomberg specifically in a couple of the posts too.

I wonder if someone somewhere has a large vested interest in fossil fuels and is annoyed about the BNEF and Bloomberg's mostly positive reporting on renewables.

Almost all of them are now only visible to people with showdead on.

To see why wind can't get much bigger without a giant breakthrough in storage see these graphs of power production and consumption:

http://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/