Yes but most people around the world never fly. Lots of people use electricity generated from coal.

Yes, but sort of irrelevant. If you want to fix a problem, start with 25% of it and not 2%.

The people who plug something into the wall won’t know the difference if the electricity is generated from something other than coal.

And please don’t wait 40 years to fix the problem.

That delay likely increased climate change by a decade or so.

> Yes, but sort of irrelevant. If you want to fix a problem, start with 25% of it and not 2%.

Those 25% from coal are themselves composed of several smaller percentages from different sources. The tricky part about climate change is that you have to start basically everywhere and look for opportunities to optimize, reduce, or completely eliminate emissions.

Not really. if you know 20-25% of emissions come from one source,…

Sure, kicking the can down the road requires more miracles now. That “we need to do everything at once” is what people say after spending half a century off basically ignoring the problem.

"one source" is a misrepresentation. Coal is burned in many regions of the planet. But each of these regions has different structural characteristics. It is not possible to solve one big "coal problem", because it is actually many individual energy supply problems that need to be solved.

Of course we need to do everything at once, that's how any change of this magnitude has to work.

I assure you the people who suggest flying should be limited to reduce carbon emissions are not the same people "kicking the can down the road" for half a century.

This assumes we can't do both simultaneously.