Hacker News Reader

So, the countries that got rich using cheap and dirty energy continue to be rich but the poor shouldn't get the chance to get rich? That's rich!

View on HN

It is going to be cheaper for poor countries to go directly to renewables. There is no law that says that you need to pollute to become wealthy. The pollute-y kinda tech was just more cost-effective in the past.

> It is going to be cheaper for poor countries to go directly to renewables.

Coal plants are the cheapest way to produce electricity. And no, solar which operates at a fraction of installed capacity and is useless for large periods of time is not a cheaper alternative.

A third of the world still burns wood for fuel. One of the most effective things we can do to curb emissions is get them using coal instead. Renewables are not in the immediate future for much of the world.

How is replacing wood with coal going to result in a decrease in emissions? That doesn’t make any sense.. wood/biomass is at least sort of renewable.

Burning wood releases more ghg per unit of energy than coal. We're not talking about biomass pellets in efficient furnaces, but actual wood in a stove. The fact that a tree can grow back in 20 years and alter the equation doesn't help us at all right now. Leaving the trees standing and instead burning coal will result in a decrease of emissions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com