The industry wants to keep burning fossil fuels, polluting the air, and killing people due to particulate emissions because it doesn't risk profits. A random m

The industry wants to keep burning fossil fuels, polluting the air, and killing people due to particulate emissions because it doesn't risk profits. A random mechanic may also volunteer their opinion that they "hate" EVs that they haven't even examined. The actual silent majority also want to keep eating meat, ingesting massive quantities of HFCS, ignoring homeless people, and pretending far-right white nationalism isn't a cabal of terrorists. This is were leadership and government regulation must make unpopular choices for the fate of the species and many other species. Fuck what people want: survival overrides the "freedom" to commit individual and industrial planetary omnicide. You are not free to be a terrorist, not permitted to overthrow the government, shout "fire" in a crowded theater, or dump sewage randomly onto neighboring properties, and so it is inconsistent to allow polluting the air like a sewer in the sky. The regulation of and phasing-out of CFC's was and will be effective at stopping and reversing ozone depletion to pre-1980's levels by 2075. The same must be done with ICEs, methane emissions, and industrial processes. It's not a "should" or a "nice to have", it's an absolute nonnegotiable requirement for survival. Then, to reach and maintain net negative emissions: bio CCS. The world must collectively and efficiently invest around a few 10's of trillions on oceanic biomass growth and sequestration. Life, and specifically life in the oceans, are the most readily scalable processes for capturing massive amounts of carbon.