I somewhat disagree. It will disrupt a single complex that's been perpetuated, and yes, it will create and allow for a lot of innovation - however producing product and developing resources into buildings, and other systems, cause tons of pollution and non-renewable destruction of our lands. It will actually be bad IMHO in certain circumstances if non-polluting energy comes too soon to us.
If I follow correctly, you believe that non-polluting energy would loosen constraints on production and the acceleration of growth this would cause would have a net negative environmental effect because the increase in non-energy-creation-related pollution would more than counter balance the savings from non-polluting energy. Is that an accurate summary?
Assuming rules / laws / regulations weren't put in place to counter this, yes. We all know how fast government is to act ... which is why there should be concern.
Bollocks to that. You would prefer we remain hamstrung with expensive finite dire polluting energy sources so we can keep the vast majority of humanity stuck in poverty? A pox on your thought processes.
The biggest problem is people, not technical. Too many of them, and they are too irrational, or uneducated or held captive economically by the current events. Unfortunate this problem is unsolvable in conventional moral and ethical terms, but a working solution would be worth trillions to the remaining rent collecting population.