Actually the issue is later in the chain, "don't increase the atmospheric amount of climate gas" in first order. You're free to take out the fossil fuels if yo

Actually the issue is later in the chain, "don't increase the atmospheric amount of climate gas" in first order. You're free to take out the fossil fuels if you do not use them as fuels but make plastic or whatever (which may lead to other unrelated problems), or if you manage to someone keep the CO2 from being emitted it should also be ok (and again can lead to problems, this time related, such as local and global risk of leakage etc). On the other hand, other greenhouse gases such as methane or those from deforestation are also problematic. The order of magnitude right now is a lot smaller than the first problem, but that may not stay so. There are also some talks of deliberate climate engineering, which, in first order, may have chances to work (most involved on a deeper level think it's too risky). All in all, the issue is quite complicated and there are a lot of possible (technical, not just economical/social) solutions with advantages and disadvantages, which I think makes the issue even harder to acknowledge.