Solar generation is generally quite dispersed instead of few monolithic coal plants.
That's just solar. There is also wind and wave, geo-thermal and many more ways to generate electricity (power). That's diversification and that surely is easier to defend.
I would suggest that relying on one power source is painting yourself into a corner and then drinking the paint.
You’re aware that that is exactly what the GP poster was arguing against, right?
I understand a "back out plan" but it turns out that there are unfortunate side effects to burning fossils, so it isn't a really decent plan.
Not once did GGP suggest an alternative. No one really wants to drink paint but in the immortal words of Mr F Gump: "Stupid is as stupid does".
I still drive a petrol (gas) powered car and even when I eventually get my eye wateringly expensive electric car, I might have range issues, despite living on a small island group off of Europe - the UK.
However, that new car (with loads of plastics etc etc) will run on unicorn farts ... electricity. What generates that 'leccy is another matter too.
You and I cannot change the world but we can at least point ourselves in the direction that we would like it to go. For me that would involve less fossil fuels.
It is less environmentally damaging than maintaining fracking operations for oil/nat gas, extremely abundant in the U.S., and can be spun up or down on the order of hours so emissions can be kept minimal when plants are not needed.
Eventually renewables will be all we use and eventually fossil fuels will no longer be needed. But between now and eventually, maintaining backup capacity is necessary and coal is probably the best option for that for the continental U.S. Nuclear only works as a base load, fracking/oil has even worse side effects, fusion isn’t ready, and we don’t have much untapped hydrothermal/geothermal
Coal's been driven out of the market because it can't compete with natural gas. Solids are not as easily handled as gases.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/where-our-na...
Sun and wind are different to coal and oil as power generation sources, however oil n that are finite and diminishing. OK so they probably won't run out in your or my lifetime but that is hardly "never".
[1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tambora-1815-volcanic-eruption/
There have been some impressive sun blocks in the past but if, say, Yellowstone went off in a doomsday scenario, then we would not be worrying about electricity generation. It is far more likely that we (humanity as a whole) would be back in the stone age but with jolly refined language skills!
If we have all the other renewables available we do stand some sort of a chance of keeping going, despite a cataclysm.
I don't think that banking on coal n that is a good idea.
(Does the US even manufacture PV panels? Or are they mostly -- or even all -- built overseas?)
If you disregard the environmental aspects of energy security, surely: banking on a non renewable, finite and diminishing resource is silly.
We will probably not run out in my life time but I for one give a shit about my grand daughters's future quality of life. They will need 'leccy so they can sulk at the dinner table whilst doom scrolling on their phones (one is close). By the time they are old enough to get really pissy about the climate and granddad is a deposit for a mortgage, oil will probably have run out and coal will be distinctly brown coloured.
Even the UK is dragging manufacture of stuff back in-house from abroad. Many of my customers make things here. I'm sure the US is doing the same.
I suppose this wouldn't be the first time the mainland introduced onerous requirements onto its territories (see: Jones Act)
https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/clean-energy-hawaii/our-cle...