Utilizing wind, and solar electrical energy generation, causes an increase in carbon emissions . . .
. . . a doubling, actually.
"I have made this point forever, but it always bears repeating -- the variability of wind and solar require hot fossil fuel backups that leads to little reduction in total fossil fuel generation capacity (so that wind and solar investments are entirely duplicative) and less-than-expected reductions in actual emissions."
This only accounts for the generation of the power. As Britain found out, siting the windmill, or solar can also be damaging. Apparently, the places in Britain where these alternative energy facilities make economic sense, the siting and ground preparation releases so much carbon, that it is not a carbon neutral or carbon negative endeavor. With the real price of wind and solar higher than the real price of nuclear, natural gas, or coal fired electrical generation, the only reason to add the alternatives is carbon reduction.
Thus, if there is no carbon reduction, there is absolutely no reason to add the alternatives.
This is little more than a belief overriding rational thought.