Sigh.

OK, this is basically bad metrics.

Yes, by tonnage NG produces a lot of co2, but they're measuring gas emissions from both, while coal has non-gas emissions they don't count.

They're basically comparing the worst case NG emissions with the beyond best case coal emissions assuming we forced them to use maximum particulate reclamation and carbon capture and sequestration.

Which is great, but we have no large-scale working examples of that in this country, and this is the kind of BS they spout to get people to let them build more plants with minimum protections then act shocked when we say anything.

NG produces co2, but that's about it, it's the cleanest fossil fuel we have, if they have a problem with that they should push for renewable or nuclear.

BTW, for future lessons, this is modern lobbying now: claim numbers from a solution you have 0 intention of implementing just so they'll let you get started, then do whatever you want once their back is turned.

The moment it's off the ground they parade kids crying about not understanding why their daddies are losing their jobs, making everybody else the monster.