I had to think about how to respond to this, because on one level I totally hear ya that there are a million little wins to be had in a billion different ways.

I had to think about how to respond to this, because on one level I totally hear ya that there are a million little wins to be had in a billion different ways. Novel engineering tweaks and behavioral hacks are everywhere, much of it low-hanging fruit with low barriers (induction stoves, LED lights, whatever), while others eventually become a no-brainer given enough time (why not an EV if you're mostly just urban commuting anyway). But I don't think that's quite enough, mathematically. You nailed the heart of the issue: > It takes way too many things that make life worth living. I expect that you and others have a different perspective. I can accept that. > Change works only when you give them something good first before you take away what they know no matter how bad it is. Fundamentally, people don't want to lose something they've had already. Many don't even want to be inconvenienced. They view any sort of minor intrusion on their lives as government overreach -- maybe partially by personality, but also due to the intense conservative propaganda advancing this "me vs them" viewpoint on purpose. It's faux Old West ruggedness mixed with weaponized individualism. We've stopped being able to even think about collective problems, much less solving them. For what it's worth, I don't live in a city either, but in a pretty rural area where EVs aren't super practical, frequently fly (and don't care about the contrails), etc. So this isn't me soapboxing, just pointing out that my own climate scorecard is pretty terrible too. Maybe given a few hundred years people will trend towards wisdom and more ecologically sound behavior. But we don't really have that kind of time. It's kinda like wartime drafts... you can build up a standing army of volunteers if you have the decades and resources to slowly accumulate them, but in the heat of the moment, sometimes you just need to round people up against their will. Climate isn't quite THAT urgent, but if we wait for volunteers... well, we've already been doing that for three or four decades. The environmentalists have been doing it forever, and other people do it here or there... and mathematically it just doesn't add up to enough. That's how we got here in the first place. It's not a "death cult" to want stronger reins on private liberties in order to secure a collective well-being. It's an ideology, but one that half of America does not want, and without them, the rest of the world doesn't stand much of a chance. Unless China singlehandedly decides to do something about it, which might make a big enough difference. But not everything in the world can be solved by individual willpower alone. Sometimes it's individual will that's the problem to begin with. Our freedoms aren't infinite, and our choices have very real life-and-death consequences for others in the world.