Statement–Argument — Should India immediately stop digging coal from its mines? Arguments: I) Yes; present coal stocks will not last long at the current mining rate. II) No; India lacks sufficient alternative energy sources to replace coal quickly. III) No; an immediate stop would harm millions of livelihoods and disrupt industry. Choose the strong argument(s).

Introduction / Context:
Energy transitions must balance climate goals, reliability, affordability, and livelihoods. The proposal to stop coal mining “immediately” is evaluated against resource adequacy and socio-economic stability.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Coal supplies a significant share of baseload and peak power.
• Replacement capacity (renewables, storage, gas, nuclear) cannot be scaled overnight.
• Millions depend on coal value chains (mines, transport, power, steel, ancillary services).

Concept / Approach:
Argument II is strong: without adequate substitutes, an abrupt stop endangers grid reliability and economic output. Argument III is strong: sudden cessation creates severe employment and regional-economy shocks. Argument I is weak: resource finiteness suggests managed decline and efficiency, not an immediate halt; prudent policy paces down coal while growing alternatives.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Countries pursuing decarbonization sequence coal phase-downs with firming capacity and just-transition funds—supporting II and III.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“I&II” wrongly elevates I; “I&III” mixes a weak with a strong; “All” overstates; “None” understates.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing “immediate stop” with “planned phase-down”; the latter aligns with reliability and justice.

Final Answer:
Only II and III are strong.