So much incorrect stuff in this post. Let me tackle just a little piece.

The writer confuses average annual output of nameplate rating with the amount of time the wind blows. The wind blows about roughly 80% of the time in good wind sites. Rarely does it blow hard enough to produce 100% of nameplate output, just like you seldom drive your car at full speed. Over time turbines in average places produce 1/3 of their nameplate rating. In excellent sites they can produce an average of 50% of nameplate.

Some turbines will need to be replaced after 20 years, mostly because the soil structure in those areas permit more tower movement and result in tower/footing damage. Right now about 2,400 30 year old turbines at Altamont wind farm are being replaced. Being replaced not because they are worn out, but because the space could be better utilized by taller, higher output models.

Coal plants do not last 100 years. If a coal plant continues to operate in that location for 100 years it is because it has been rebuilt over the years. Same with nuclear, except we can’t rebuild them in the same way. Our forty year old plants are pushing their lifetime limits. Some will make it to 60 years, perhaps further, but the weakest are already dropping off the grid. Oyster Creek, for example, is now going to be shut down ten years earlier than was anticipated because it’s just worn out.

So much misinformation in this post. Area required for solar is just silly. Material needs for construction are fantasy.

Wind energy is particulary bad. Windmills hit ~0.1 kg/W nameplate but only run 1/4 of the time. Machines last ~ 20 y versus ~100 y for a coal or atomic power plant. Energy storage by vapor-compression NH3-H2O separation loses half the energy. NH3-H2O produces power by recombination in an absorption column that drives a steam turbine. Toss in line loss and effective utilization is 10%. 0.1 kg-Fe/W nameplate translates into ~1 kg-Fe/W.
Windmill power density is ~ 3 W/m^3 nameplate. With above dispatchable 10% utilization, this translates into 0.3 W/m^2. 50 Twe requires entire earth’s land area to be covered by windmills. Not going to happen
Solar with NH3-H20 separation/recombination results in ~20 W/m^2 averaged over time. 50 TWe requires 3 times the area of Texas. Just 2 mm sheet metal that size represents ~30 years Fe production. Toss in the 400 ft NH3 storage sphere per GWe and planet is destroyed producing the materials.
So you are starting to run out of stuff already. It will get worse if continued. Give it up. Real choice is: do atomic piles, do coal or do without. Energy “conservation” is really doing without. Human race remains starving mud suckers in the dark.

China monopolized both lithium and rare-earth minerals because they were able to produce refined quantities of each and forced existing plants in other countries out of business. Now that demand is up and pushing the limits of what China can produce we’re opening/reopening mines and plants.

Here are a couple of articles which explain why China does not have us by the short and curlies….

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/26655/?p1=A1

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091215101708.htm