In a simplified view this is true, but they are also irreducible; We'll never reach any meaningful action if we don't make it economically advantageous to pursue alternatives that "just so happen" to be climate positive. That would be akin to getting someone to exercise solely because "it's good for you".
This is largely if not almost entirely caused by natural gas prices that make variable cost close to zero; it's essentially a waste product in producing oil for much of the country. The challenge is getting it from wellhead to consumer, but power plants are different than individual consumers. It powers more than a 1/3 currently (vs < 10% wind/solar) and for much of current coal is a very easy substitute. If we could ever get to on-site electricity generation (with the byproduct of heating homes and businesses) we could make huge reductions in pollution and gains in efficiency. Increased nuclear would be a big win for the environment as well but is a social-political untouchable for a variety of real and made-up reasons.