[ericmay]

This isn't a good comparison. A more appropriate one would be to compare the environmental damage, cost, and deaths due to cars to the "wall socket like magic" versus seeing a physical car on the road. You don't have to go to the hospital to see people who were maimed, and you don't really see the strip mining taking place to create cars, for example.

[aussieshibe]

What? I'm not making any comparison I think?

The person I replied to said (paraphrasing) "Why aren't cars going away? If they aren't, why can't you make the same arguments about coal power plants".

I'm saying:

- Cars aren't going away because they are much better than any available alternative for a large number of people from a short term perspective

- The same can't be said of coal power because electricity is electricity is electricity, there is no immediate difference, so the longer term differences have a greater impact on decision making

[ericmay]

> We can't apply the same arguments to power plants because we don't have to go to / see / interact with the power plant in order to use electricity

My reading was that you were comparing physical presence of cars + coal plants and also the negative externalities of coal plants but not accounting for the negative externalities of cars.

But I may have misread and I apologize if I did :)