As you said, the developed nations did the exact same thing (including to less developed ones they also stole resources from), and now they expect the rest of the world not to do the same?

People won't give up on a 'modern' lifestyle or better conditions just because it's bad for the environment. Even less so because a bunch of people living in better conditions say it could be bad for them in the distant future.

The only fix is to figure out how to make renewable energy cheaper and easier than non renewable energy worldwide. So it wins on a financial level rather than a moral feel good one.

But we have a small population and our economy is stable, there are other places where we can not expect to do this.

Now it is all changed. Oh, and by going for coal now, developing nations are going to make their electricity more expensive for the next 40 years than it would be if they went with renewables. Is that smart for economic development. And besides that they are going to be promoting climate changes that will be very damaging, including economically, to their own countries.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the developing countries are buying all these coal plants from China at least partly because the people making the decisions got bribed. From what I understand, that is the norm when it comes to China.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-01/cheaper-s...

Natural gas is cheaper than coal in the US:

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/article...

SolarCity is experimenting with batteries powered by intermittent power supply in small islands but nothing at scale really exists a practical proven tech.

Natural gas requires high security LNG terminal infra if you're not a producer

You would need some backbone before you can add solar on top (e.g. what happens at night?)

Building a powerplant that is supposed to operational for 50 years when it may only be economically viable for 5 or 10 leads to a warping of the per-unit economics, even before taking into consideration public health and environmental damage.

Pakistan should ask the west for a zero interest after inflation loan to install green alternatives.

What makes you think coal only has a 5 to 10 year viable economic life span? If the world starts moving toward green(er) alternatives won't coal become cheaper?

In any case, even if there aren't any, the question still stands. Being poor is no defense against the effects of climate change.

And being poor means that my primary problem is "What will I eat tomorrow". So "What might happen in 50 years" is really secondary. I'll solve it after solving my primary problem.

But Pakistan is borrowing money for coal plants that will be used for 40 years, while solar+gas will be cheaper within a decade.

But being wealthy is a fairly good defence against the effects of climate change. Reliable affordable electricity is a prerequisite to wealth.

Coal is non explosive, easily carted around safely