I'm talking about the surprising use of the word "alternative" to describe the fuel of the first industrial revolution and nuclear power.

As for whether we can effectively put aside coal when energy scarcity increases, the answer, in the abstract, is no. But we're certainly not in the abstract. To reuse the article's classification, coal goes against Kyoto and Moscow (iirc there isn't that much competitive coal in Europe) and thus is a tough technology to promote.

Rien n'est gratuit en ce bas monde. Tout s'expie, le bien comme le mal, se paie tot ou tard. Le bien c'est beaucoup plus cher, forcement. Celine