Now there I agree, but that appears down to the unique success anti-science lobbying is having in the US right now. The US has long had a political structure th

Now there I agree, but that appears down to the unique success anti-science lobbying is having in the US right now. The US has long had a political structure that is not amenable to regulation -- so it comes particularly slowly, and often later than elsewhere. Forbes piece is correct that much coal has been replaced by gas, but it is not (necessarily) as bad as it tries to make out. That mirrors the UK experience 10 or so years ago, when we had a dash for gas. Already those gas plants are becoming uneconomic -- so much for their expected 50+ year life. We've already had a couple of closures, and one of the gas generators are busy trying to pivot to renewables. This under a Conservative government that has outlawed cheaper onshore wind and backed fracking, two decisions even their own membership disagree with. So it may well be gas starts dropping out of US generation in a decade, not ideal, but potentially OK on course for 2050 neutrality. US gas prices and love of the car may prove more intractable, but I haven't quite lost hope yet.