RE: Solar Misperceptions
The key to keep in mind is the environment impact. The fossil fuels are detrimental when something goes wrong and very costly to clean up. Considering the Deepwater Horizon Disaster has reached almost $62 BILLION, plus the loss of the oil and this number is still rising.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/07/14/bp-deepwater-horizon-costs/87087056/
That is not factored in. Plus solar is a passive technology and requires limited maintenance on the utility scale and has no upkeep fuel. So the cost are minimal. Now factor in its ease of installation on rooftops and we utilize space that otherwise is ignored.
Overall the bang is quite significant when taken as a whole. The simple fact that as the world transitions to renewables it is an easy phase in and bridge technology.
Considering sometimes quite great subvention on solar pannel, solar may appears more attractive.
I think renewable energy are a must path in any way, then we should consider environmental attribute such as sunlight time and power and wind time and speed, then check economical and environmental (EROI) impact to wisely choose the best solution.
Diversity is a key.
They are quite attractive. Every solar panel at minimum means less pollution and less fossil fuels. Just like putting insulation around pipes to prevent temperature loss, although as in your diagram solar is only 1 point behind natural gas. Solar provides the incentive of greater deployment and no subsequent fuel in comparison.
The EROI is apparent with solar and has been since the 80's, the difference now being that the cost has gotten so low that it should be deployed everywhere possible! It is the wise choice to utilize the abundant energy that takes little to implement compared to the extraction process, threat from spills, and pollution given forth in the use of fossil fuels.
It is more than diversity, it is protecting quality of life.