Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about the coal-fired plants cheerfully mentioned in the article strikes you as good for the environment?
What's the bar for ecological spending? They should use more expensive energy solutions than say America? Why? I'd criticize each American coal plant in turn, before turning to blame 3rd-world development.
The US is not some magical pollution-free paradise, but at least the air is comfortably breathable here 365 days a year in most places.
It's amusing when the authorities put out an air quality alert here in the DC area. It's important for sensitive populations, but it's almost impossible for a normal person to even notice the difference. A code red air quality day in DC would be a delightfully clear and clean day in Beijing.
They should use cleaner energy solutions because they're killing a shitload of people right now. Dirty coal is only cheaper if you ignore the costs imposed by the pollution.