It is not blindingly clear to those nations that are developing.<p>China has brought their coal plants online and they use 4,361,427 thousand short tons of unfiltered or carbon captured coal to the United States carbon capturing EPA mandated 924,442 thousand short tons. Compare areas that have coal plants with those which do not in China versus America [3] and you can see that our nation has it under control and China does not. [1]<p>Are we honestly going to another country and tell them to quit developing?<p>Do we have the will to force them to give up their coal fired plants for nuclear energy (which from internal announcements is set to make up only 5% of their power structure), or natural gas? What does that will look like, money, political manipulation, force?<p>How can you say that computer projections are more reliable now than they were before? Hurricane projections, using state of the art modeling for a shortened horizon cannot say whether a hurricane in three days will bear west or east of Florida. The validation of the computer projections of today will not be evaluated for another fifteen years, all the while, every day you can continue on with that statement, essentially: &quot;All of the previous models had errors, but today&#x27;s model is perfect.&quot;<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eia.gov&#x2F;beta&#x2F;international&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eia.gov&#x2F;beta&#x2F;international&#x2F;</a><p>[2] I do not have a picture that correctly does this justice, there are ones that are doctored by greenpeace and others where the plant is not running at capacity. So this is not a fair comparison.<p>[3] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ecorevolution.it&#x2F;img&#x2F;pho&#x2F;me6.jpg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ecorevolution.it&#x2F;img&#x2F;pho&#x2F;me6.jpg</a>