>>Hopefully you acknowledge that the energy requirements of NZ and the US are a bit different :)

Not sure what the throw-away line means. My understanding is that annual electricity use per capita between 2010 and 2014 is : NZ 9373KW : US 12974KW. The US uses more - but you can do the math, and that's not any sort of explanation for NZ having 80% of electricity from renewable energy and aiming for 90% via the same means as the US, while some people in the US express dismay at the idea of increasing to 28%.

>>Solar and wind are not large-scale reliable sources. The entire supply/demand model are completely different. That's not a value judgment on one country vs another, it's a simple statement of fact.

Citations? My understanding is that dopey politicians and subsidies are queering the pitch. Promoting solar power in Northern Germany probably is daft, but makes great sense at theme parks further South that aim for total electricity self-sufficiency. Arizona ought to be a no brainer. Wind power is at 5% and increasing in NZ, but that's because there's a Cook Strait across the Roaring Forties which cannot be extrapolated to a farm in the middle of the Great Plains. So I agree people need to be sensible rather than erecting certain failures to scoop up some subsidies. Apart from that, seems to me this is of those ones where you don't know what you don't know until you find out. If it turns out to be a bust in NZ: we'll look at hydro again, or newer ways to harness sea currents. We won't freeze (literally) for fear of making a mistake: we'll try to fix the problem, not the blame. As will the US and just about any first world economy you can name.