I feel as if you missed their point. Their point from my understanding is, coal might be more expensive than new renewables/batteries, but it's significantly quicker to get up and running so if you have a choice between quick coal and nothing, coal will be chosen.

▲

triceratops 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> coal might be more expensive than new renewables/batteries, but it's significantly quicker to get up and running

How so? I can have a crew out installing panels tomorrow.

	▲	wasfgwp 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		10-100+ MW of panels?

▲

toomuchtodo 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I am not missing the point. You can deploy hundreds of megawatts of solar and batteries providing firm generation in 12-18 months. You cannot build a coal generator that quickly (usually takes 2-5 years). If you can turn on or up an existing coal generator, yes, faster. If you must build it from scratch, no, slower. Solar and batteries are not only the cheapest form of new generation, they are also the fastest to deploy.

Citations:

Economics of coal versus renewables in Southeast Asia’s energy crisis - https://zerocarbon-analytics.org/energy/coal-vs-renewables-a... - April 8th, 2026

Key points:

* Since the war in Iran began in February 2026, a surge in oil and gas prices has triggered gas-to-coal switching in Southeast Asia, pushing Asia’s coal benchmark nearly 20% above the pre-war price levels and highlighting the links between the coal, gas and oil markets.

* Gas-to-coal switching also pushed coal prices up after the 2022 gas crisis, when Asia’s coal benchmark surged to a record USD 443 per tonne in September 2023.

* Renewables sit apart from the price volatility of coal, oil and gas, as they do not require ongoing fuel inputs. In 2024, solar was already cheaper than coal in 7 of the 10 member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), according to LCOE data.

* The current gas crisis is already causing a decline in LNG demand across ASEAN countries. New ZCA analysis shows that were ASEAN to replace its planned 45 GW gas expansion with coal, costs would rise; in contrast, we found the Association could save USD 4 billion if gas expansion plans were instead replaced with solar and storage solutions by 2030.

* Even in countries with large coal reserves and coal subsidies, including China, renewables are already meeting a significant share of new electricity demand.

Coal Power Is Replaced by Renewables, Batteries, and Modern Electronics - https://www.renewable-ei.org/en/activities/column/REupdate/2... - September 18th, 2025

▲

HDBaseT 5 hours ago | parent [-]

You can deploy solar and batteries rapidly, Australia is doing it.

Australia has the highest number of solar panels per capita in the world. Batteries are following suit with government subsidies. Yet, Australia has some of the highest energy prices in the world, its not a fool proof solution.

My comment wasn't even really about coal, it was about oil (and fuel). I'm talking about transport (even public transport) but planes & massive tankers are the big consumers. The original point is simply we cannot just stop ships.

When ships stopped due to the routes being blocked, we pushed ever closer to a recession and people starved and died because they were denied critical produces, equipment, food and medicines all over the world. Not to mention cost of living. This is what I mean by we "cannot afford" to not use oil.

We cannot afford for the routes to be shut, we cannot ban boats, cars, planes without major economic downturn.

	▲	wasfgwp 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Australia is pretty unique since it’s extremely suitable for solar. Countries in more northern latitudes, especially in Europe (where you need alternative sources in winter regardless of how much solar you (realistically) build) are in a slightly different situation. Also aren’t wholesale prices in Australia very cheap or often negative? If that’s the case then the issue very high prices isn’t really on the production side but due to taxes/distribution