The Lazard study includes carbon pricing which is exactly what I said: “[All studies] provided account for an additional theoretical externality cost on our wel

The Lazard study includes carbon pricing which is exactly what I said: “[All studies] provided account for an additional theoretical externality cost on our well being for coal”. Like every industry in the last decade, coal generators have also become more efficient. I’d be shocked (heh) if solar power becomes more efficient given the Shockley-Quessier limit of PV cells which have a maximum efficiency in the best theoretical case with an infinite stacking of panels of 30%. Large synchronous machines on the other hand, in practice, can have a 95% efficiency. Here’s a study without the “carbon pricing”: https://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MITEI-WP-2016-01.pdf https://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MITEI-WP-2... Again coal is much cheaper. I’m sympathetic to your agenda but it’s deceitful and unfair to presume agreement given the unique circumstances theses results affect conclusions. A place like Nigeria has to worry about what’s happening to their people in the next month rather than in the next 50 years, thus they’ll have different trade offs to make.