Good point. If you think about it logically, the climate has been in equilibrium for millions of years. Energy comes from the sun, does something to the planet, then radiates out into space. When you harness wind, tidal or solar energy, the equilibrium remains the same; however, if you burn stuff, like wood, coal or oil, or you make heat with nuclear ot chemicals (bombs and fireworks), you add heat into the system, which, in theory, should disrupt the equilibrium. Nuclear energy might be clean, but it's not going to solve global warming.Last year only 30% of the total electric power generated in the uk used fossil fuel technology. Wind, solar, nuclear and wood pellets generated the rest - about 70%.
The uk for most of the year is not an ideal solar powerhouse, but southern Europe and North Africa could become the new Saudi Arabia if they could sort out the political issues which hold them back. Very high voltage DC transmission could be delivering vast amounts of electric power across the Med with only 10% losses.
It is surprising that more has not been done to utilise the vast amount of sunlight that just heats up sand in N Africa.