I suspect it is more ideologically (and financially) driven propaganda than fact-based argumentation.   But,

Consumption from renewable sources and hydropower in China grew by a quarter in 2012.

But that growth came from a low baseline, and was more than offset by an increase of 6.4 percent in coal, which has a higher baseline. Coal accounted for 68 percent of Chinese energy consumption in 2012.

Other significant CO2 increases occurred in Japan (+6.9 percent) and Germany (+1.8 percent), pushed by a switch to coal to offset dependence on nuclear.

"CO2 emissions +2.2% in 2012, driven by China and coal"
Phys.org

In 2012 many countries increased dependence on coal. German emissions increased 1.8 per cent in 2012, with coal growing at 4.2 per cent.

"Coal continues to dominate global carbon emissions"
AlphaGalileo

I think the thrust of the WSJ article is that wind and solar are still too inconsistent energy sources, and coal -- being abundant and cheap -- is the easy, convenient and logical thing to turn to to make up for that shortcoming, especially after dropping nuclear.

Point n'est besoin d'espérer pour entreprendre, ni de réussir pour persévérer. - Charles le Téméraire