> the few, heavily qualified glimmers of hope that I see, tend to have more to do with technology and energy economics than with policy That's because the only

> the few, heavily qualified glimmers of hope that I see, tend to have more to do with technology and energy economics than with policy That's because the only glimmers of hope we currently have are pure wishful thinking. Pointing toward accelerated technological change is pointing towards the non-existing, and of course that can be hopeful, but it's not guaranteed to change anything. The only real change is not hopeful, because we know it won't happen, but it's what would work: drastic reduction in carbon footprint worldwide through policy. So we cling on to what might happen, and might work: the magic device, the magic technology, the iPhone of the climate apocalypse, the thing that will solve our issue. We don't need a thing, we need less things, less carbon in the atmosphere and the unavoidable slowdown of the fossil fueled economy it brings with it.