It depends. Fossil fuels are still a major source, which needs to be replaced as soon as possible with something else (where "something else" probably means some combination of solar, wind, and nuclear).

What I'm saying is that in our long term planning, we shouldn't be thinking "we have X terawatts of fossil fuel production capacity so we need to build out X terawatts of non-fossil-fuel production capacity to replace it (including storage, as needed)" We should be thinking "We probably need ~2X terawatts of additional production because we're replacing fossil fuels for electricity generation in addition to transitioning to electricity-based heating and transportation."

The same place hamburger, bacon, and keebler cookies.

elves