But what we are exercising here with climate change is a new form of international governance. We are writing the constitution of how the globe will be managed for the future. In a traditional sense, it would take a WW III to effect such an entity. But I think that this entity will be forced upon us regardless.
Our task is to ensure we do not create a monster (nor Beast).
'Get rid of fossil fuels' as a statement -
1. Bears very little meaning in a market sense - it just sounds good and makes 'holy-mandate' minds feel better - words as weapons
2. Bears no method of implementation, or even real possibility of being done
3. Bears no assessment of the unintended consequences
4. Is based upon some other political agenda/hatred than climate health
5. Serves to displace the combustion of hyrdocarbons to places which are out of sight so we can pretend it doesn't happen, and
6. Will ultimately cause more harm than good.
This is what happened with 'Zero Landfill' mandates over the past decade. You paid someone to take your VOC waste, and come back and tell you 'Yep, it did not go into a landfill (but we have no idea where it is now)'.
It is analogue to 'Kill all the lawyers'. It is stupidity. So, this is what we are comparing to.