No-one would be opposed to "taking better care of the place we live". This is a strong indication that this is not an honest way to frame the dispute. Cuts in

No-one would be opposed to "taking better care of the place we live". This is a strong indication that this is not an honest way to frame the dispute. Cuts in emissions (e.g., the 80% cuts the EU is pushing for) will require major cuts in energy usage. We know what a low-energy economy looks like - it looks like a pre-industrial economy. We might not need to go back to the middle ages, but we'd need to reverse many advances of the industrial revolution. In contrast, we're facing a maximum of 59cm of sea level rise by 2100. (IPCC estimate). That's not desirable but it is manageable - at least if we maintain our technological, industrial civilisation.