I see nothing in the article about helping workers who would be out of jobs when coal plants shut down. The headlines will read "Billionaire causes thousands of blue-collar workers to lose their jobs".
Do you actually want us to be drowning in the horse manure, literally tonnes a day, from still depending on horses, because horseless carriages will under employ postboys and farriers?
Similar problems is with state workers in bureaucracies. In my country, citizens spend hours in queues, filling forms etc. when it could all be done online and have simpler laws.
If the purpose is for the state worker to have a job, let her stay at home and get paid, rather than causing more harm just to have a job.
(I’m not pro coal or anything, but I just don’t share the view that transitioning to higher tech solutions doesn’t have negative externalities—it does but they are borne by people largely outside the conversation, much like global heating).
Most wind and solar jobs are temporary construction/installation jobs. It takes a year or two for hundreds of workers to build a solar farm. Then the site can operate for 20 years or more with just a handful of permanent employees. Jobs in manufacturing the equipment used for renewable generation are steadier but also less plentiful. Factories for making batteries, turbines, inverters, and solar modules are already thrifty with human labor and becoming more so over time.
I actually think that these characteristics of renewable generation are benefits, overall. Aging populations benefit from technological developments that enable the same material standard of living with fewer prime-age workers. Low labor intensity also means that renewable electricity prices can fall further until hitting a price floor set by the wages of plant workers.
See a previous analysis here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13750787