Obama is waging a war on cool and it’s a great idea!

The truth, however, is that a war on coal is a good
idea.

Here’s an analogy. I live down the block from Le Diplomate,
a popular newish restaurant in D.C. This restaurant, in the course
of doing its business, generates a lot of trash. And by district
law, like other commercial establishments it needs to pay a garbage
company to haul that trash away. It would, of course, be cheaper
for them to just leave the trash in the alley rather than paying
for cleanup. But this wouldn’t be a real efficiency gain of any
kind. It’s just that the cost of trash disposal would be shifted
off the shoulders of Le Diplomate’s owner (who conveniently lives
in Philadelphia) and onto the shoulders of those of us who live on
the block.

That’s the basic business model of coal-fired power
plants—huge costs are borne by people who use the air rather than
by the people who burn the coal.

The “war on coal” consists of beginning to ask coal-burners
to actually bear the costs of burning coal. A restaurant that’s
only going to be profitable if it’s allowed to dump garbage in the
alley rather than haul it away ought to be shut down.

So there’s no difference between a restaurant in DC and a source
of fuel that provides power to millions of people.