Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
17. OK, that makes sense.
Fri Mar 16, 2012, 02:26 PM
Mar 2012

It's well laid out, consistent and convincing as far as it goes. I just have one question.

The displacement of local coal consumption by NG consumption reduces the local demand for coal. However the mining companies still want to make money. What means do you propose to prevent the un-needed coal from being exported at a profit and then burned someplace else where there are poor gas supplies (i.e. the NG displacement hasn't happened yet)?

Unless we can keep that coal in the ground, the world is no better off. How do you see that part of the picture unfolding?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»UK opposes a 2030 renewab...»Reply #17