I do find it interesting. Part of me agrees with him, and part of me does not. The part that doesn't still finds the discourse helpful because it may help some people reconsider their positions on stuff.

The author is spot on when it comes to fossil energy, in my opinion. Fossil energy alone is what catapulted civilization beyond burning wood for everything. And some key aspects of fossil fuels simply have no current replacement. The energy density of batteries is no match for a tank of gasoline or diesel or a pile of coal.

I disagree, however, that loss of access to electricity could occur in the US in just a few decades. Two things could limit access: insufficient generation or lack of wires. The wires are easy, and I think society will take reduced safety before losing access altogether. Generation would take a similar road, with people burning coal and garbage with the ash and flue gases going straight up the stack with no emissions controls. Nuclear would go a similar route, lifting or ignoring safety regulations to keep lights on. I think those are necessary first steps before any significant lack of access, and we aren't there yet.