Coal's lingering role complicates climate change efforts

We cant afford to follow the patterns of the past when it comes to transition times.

The message of the article is important. It seems that in order to decrease the burning of coal in absolute terms we can several things. We can develop alternative sources of energy that are cheaper than coal. Currently, natural gas is fulfilling that role, and to a lesser extant, green energy. Another thing we can do is to use energy more efficiently, so as to reduce the total amount of energy needed. And lastly, we can make a conscious decision not to use coal, for the obvious reasons. Here in California we used coal for about 10% of our electrical generation in 2000, 1% in 2007, and 0.2% in 2016. Instead of deciding to burn more coal, we decided to burn less. The amount spent on electricity per household in CA is among the lowest in the country.

Nationwide, up until the end of the Obama administration, coal use declined almost 30% in absolute terms over the previous decade.

Lingering role? Joking! China is looking to develop a mammoth coal mine in Queensland (Australia) and with the Adani development pending things don't look too optimistic for the True Believers in Global Warming Theories. The internal combustion engine is still said to be a problem but there isn't much being said about that lately.

Co2 = plant food

Lingering role? Joking! China is looking to develop a mammoth coal mine in Queensland (Australia) and with the Adani development pending things don't look too optimistic for the True Believers in Global Warming Theories. The internal combustion engine is still said to be a problem but there isn't much being said about that lately.

With Labor's election in a few months and the volume of protest being directed at Labor from the ascendant left in that party, I think Labor will cave on Adani and there will be no new Chinese mine either.

The majority of the country I would wager are against these mines now.