@OldMetalHead If it gets bad enough, & it very well might, we will see mass migrations of not just animals, but people, like never before. It will get ugly trying to stem that tide...

Yes, the coal, oil and natural gas producers would have us believe that clean energy is ruinous to our economy. Their “problem” is the incredible opportunity that exists in the renewable energy sector, even as these extractors try to find ways to get on board. True, the pure coal, oil and natural gas companies will die off, and our air will get cleaner while our beaches will have fewer oil spills, but you can’t have it all!

@p-nullifidian, @OldMetalHead Here's a graph of coal consumption by country:

The greens here in the USA are trying to deny US citizens access to fossil fuels, while China and India burn more every year.

@OldMetalHead How?

@BD66 By green taxing the hell out of all the crap they're selling us.

@BD66 Focusing on other polluters only strengthens the point against coal, which accounts for 30% of the CO2 emissions in the US. But even if the DOE and energy engineers are able to design a method to capture all of the greenhouse emissions from coal burning, that still leaves us with the environmental disasters of strip mining and mountaintop removal.

Let’s face it, the extraction of minerals from the Earth to supply our energy needs is not sustainable. Our planet is radiated with more energy from our sun in an hour than all of humanity consumes in a year. We need to invest in solar harnessing and energy storing technologies if we are to limit greenhouse gas emissions, not to mention compete on a global scale. Instead of seeing who can burn more coal, we should endeavor to kick India and China’s butts on clean, renewable energy production and technology.

@p-nullifidian The United States is not a planet.

If you force US citizens and businesses to use more expensive forms of energy, it makes it even more difficult to compete with China and India who use the least expensive forms of energy.

The coal and fossil fuels will be burned, and the CO2 will go into the atmosphere. It just will be burned in other countries.

@BD66 Of course I realize that the US is not a planet, as I was merely illustrating the point that the world, including the US, is radiated by much more energy on a daily basis than we use in a year. We just need to collect and store it.

The argument for continuing to do something more cheaply, even when it is the wrong thing to do, has been used as a justification for many things we no longer do, starting with slavery. Most concerned and thoughtful citizens, particularly those in the scientific community, have concluded that the unabated extraction and burning of fossil fuels will lead to significant harm on a planetary scale. And we already can bear witness to the destruction of the landscape and its forests and streams caused by mountaintop removal and strip mining, an issue you’ve carefully avoided.

Finally, to assert that the continued burning of fossil fuels by other countries is a good reason for the US to do the same is ethically and morally bankrupt. The Earth’s atmosphere does not recognize international boundaries, and the harm that other nations do to the planet cannot and will not long be tolerated. How patient do you think the rest of the world would be with a nation that continued to detonate above ground nuclear explosions that radiated its neighbors with fallout? The same principle applies for the continued burning of fossil fuels, and it’s only a matter of time before a carrot and stick approach will be employed.