[strictnein]

Slavery, really? That's your analogy?

What's your viable way to replace coal today? Include explanations of how your replacement can be as reliable as coal, and how the developing world can afford these sources without sacrificing other government services.

[anon1385]

Literally millions of people are being killed by coal, without any choice in the matter[1]. What analogy would you prefer to use for something as devastating as that?

Coal only seems affordable if the significant health and environmental costs are (incorrectly) assumed to be zero.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/12/china-coa... >Emissions from coal plants in China were responsible for a quarter of a million premature deaths in 2011 and are damaging the health of hundreds of thousands of Chinese children, according to a new study.

[strictnein]

A study commissioned by Greenpeace. Yes, a very unbiased and honest source on these topics. Might as well list an NRA study on gun violence.

And read closer, please. The study claims to have found indicators pointing to shortened lives, not people being killed by coal, which is significantly different.

And, again: warmth and electricity and live to 65, or cold and darkness and live a little longer. And really, that wouldn't be the trade off, because electricity and warmth also lead to longer lives. So this study is meaningless and shows nothing at all.

[sigmar]

Don't know where you have been, but coal use has decreased the past few years. Natural gas and renewables have already started to replace coal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_power_in_the_United_States...

[strictnein]

That's just the US, where natural gas is plentiful and very cheap.

[sigmar]

well, the article is exclusively about the US. If you are up for talking about other countries, let's discuss France's coal power