This article contains a glaring contradiction. The author claims that the coal industry is dead - a zombie - yet argues that you and me, through our tax dollars, should weave a golden parachute for those that own vast coal reserves. If it is indeed kaput, then why should we soften the landing for those that have amassed great wealth from the exploitation of coal? Really dead, and not just merely dead, it stays there no matter who owns it - right? And there's the rub; it is not hardly dead, and the money behind the signs the author alluded to buys many a congress-critter who are "a friend of coal."
Since it is not really dead, then maybe it makes sense to officially sequester these reserves. So, at what price will you and I be on the hook for as we embark on this national protection racket? Something comparable to what was originally paid to farmers and ranchers during one of the many recessions of the 1800's? Something similar to the takeover of the reserves of small operators by larger ones? Or will it be based on the expected profit the large coal-holders feel entitled to at todays prices? Hmmm, that sounds awfully familiar - as in ISDS. Will there be any correction downward in the "value" of these reserves prompted by the awareness of the harm caused and the mitigation then required by burning the stuff? Not so long as climate change remains officially a "hoax" or, ahem - controversial.
I'm sorry Mr. Trahant, but if coal is really dead, then let those that have profited most from it (hint - that would NOT be the lowly miners) die along with it. No f#$%&#$g taxpayer bail-out.