This is very different. I am not being a pessimist at all. Just being brutally realistic. People are talking about "saving the planet" (in quotes because I t

This is very different. I am not being a pessimist at all. Just being brutally realistic. People are talking about "saving the planet" (in quotes because I think it is a ridiculous statement) in 20, 50 or 100 years. If humanity ceased to exist on this planet. If we all evaporated tomorrow, it would take 100K years for a 100ppm drop in CO2 levels. How the hell is installing solar panels or driving electric cars going to make that happen a THOUSAND times faster. It's like claiming we can safely stop a semi truck in 0.5 feet (roughly the width of your hand) from 65 miles per hour (normal braking distance from that speed is about 500 feet) without killing everything in it, in close proximity, causing massive destruction and using unimaginable amounts of power and energy. In other words, nice sci-fi fantasy, and that's all it is. Can't be done. I know of one paper that set out to prove renewables could solve the problem. The researchers were stunned to learn they were wrong. I commend them for printing their conclusion. To paraphrase, they said something like this: Even if we deploy the most optimal forms of renewable energy world wide, forms that have yet to be invented, the best of solar, wind and more, not only is atmospheric CO2 concentration not going to decrease, it will continue to grow. If you look at a chart of the annual contributions of CO2 by country it is easy to see how this works. I posted a link in a prior comment. You could erase the entire US and China from this planet and atmospheric CO2 concentration will not drop any faster than 100ppm in 100K years. That's reality.