I've not looked very closely at solar power, but I can believe that storage would be a problem. I think conventional plants generate power as it is needed. If you are using a boiler to generate steam to turn turbines that produce power, you can regulate the amount produced by taking turbines on and off line. I think you can also vary your fuel to the burner somewhat to change the rate at which you boil steam and thereby change the amount of power produced. With solar energy, they can only generate during the day. They have to find some way to store that energy for use at night. They can charge giant batteries, but charging batteries leads to more energy inefficiencies. It also leads to much higher costs and likely more environmental and safety issues.
I work for the chemicals division of an energy company, and I'm sure that they would market an alternative energy source if they had it. They are always playing public relations games, and marketing a new energy source would be a bonanza. Furthermore, oil production is expensive and a big headache. If they could sell off parts of the business, close other parts, lay off the extra employees, and make the same or nearly the same money in something else, they'd jump at the chance. My company is trying to get into the wind business, but I just don't think they've had much success.
Even though the energy companies work with the auto companies on some level, they are not as close as peole like to pretend. If the auto companies could develop a new way to power cars, they would gladly market it and leave the oil companies to wither on the vine. Oil companies are always trying to find ways to make the internal combustion engine more efficient in order to extend its use, but they won't have any way to stop things from changing when someone develops something new.
I don't know whether most people pay attention to the issue of alternative energy, and I don't think popular opinion is relevant. Having the masses yearning for a new energy source won't bring that source into existence. If something doesn't work, all of the wishing in the world won't make it work. We'll have a new source when someone thinks of a way to make it work. The person who has and develops this idea will likely be an individual working mostly alone. This guy or gal probably won't be an employee of an energy company but will be involved in some other technological field. I realize that this idea of how progress is made goes against the modern "let's all hold hands, understand each other, and talk about things," but I think the modern view is silly.
As an example of how you can't just demand that new energy forms be created, I remember the excitement that was stirred back around 1990 when some guys in Utah claimed to have induced cold fusion. Cold fusion is supposed to be a form of nuclear energy that is completely clean. If it ever really worked, the first company to patent the process would become incredibly rich overnight. My employer at the time was a small to mid-sized energy company, and I worked at their technical/research center. Shortly after the guys in Utah made their announcement, the CEO told a meeting that we would have the process working within a year. He put a bunch of money into the research, but it just didn't work. I never followed the public news well enough to know what happened, and I wasn't in the loop on the secret company stuff. I suspect that the guys in Utah were just mistaken in what they thought that they saw. However, I'm sure that our company didn't squelch anything that would have worked because a success would have made those involved rich beyond anyone's wildest imagination.
WFTR
Bill