>Or when it prevents a new fossil fuel power plant to open. That's not a benefit, that's a loss averted. These claims are usually over egged as well for "net z

>Or when it prevents a new fossil fuel power plant to open. That's not a benefit, that's a loss averted. These claims are usually over egged as well for "net zero" calculations. Net zero against some hypothetical averted future, but in physical reality the emissions are still there heating the atmosphere. As an analogy, I can "prevent spending" by buying a coffee machine, bulk buying some products, etc. However, there are more ways to spend money than I can even notice, and I can pile up the "savings" but still find I have no money left at the end of a month to... actually deposit into my savings. I think it's a common experience. If production of fossil fuels is not decreased by regulation, then a drop in domestic demand means more is available to export. The export price goes down, encouraging the continued use of fossil fuels abroad. Another power plant is built over there and emits GHGs.