The problem with that approach is that nobody agrees on what is frivolous. So it ends up being counter-productive as everyone squabbles about why their most hat

The problem with that approach is that nobody agrees on what is frivolous. So it ends up being counter-productive as everyone squabbles about why their most hated thing is frivolous and should be banned/regulated, whilst the thing they like provides enough benefits that is should be left alone. Off the top of my head, the things I have seen people argue should be banned due to climate effects: - Eating meat - Plane travel - Cars - Only large 4WD's ( but not cars) - Clothes dryers - Bitcoin - AI - Computer games - Christmas lights - etc