We need as many ways to theoretically cut emissions as possible. That way, no one way will ever have to be chosen by a majority of people. So we will never have to actually do any of them. And we can keep polluting but pretend "it's not my fault because I supported <insert random niche idea>".
No one wants to admit they are happy to just ruin everything. So we all need to pretend we want action. But in order to prevent any action happening we need to pick different things.
The Nuclear people won't vote for solar expansion, the solar people will deny windmills work, the windmill people will refuse to condone nuclear. That way EVERYONE can claim the moral high ground AND use nice cheap, reliable coal. The same applies for everything (electric cars? No! Hydrogen!. Hydrogen? No, public transport! Public transport? No, electric cars!).
Quoting this from an article by Australia's chief scientist Alan Finkel:
Between 1990 and 2021 the behemoth known as global civilisation only reduced its fossil-fuel diet from 87% to 83% of total energy consumed worldwide. Let me spell that out. We shaved off 4% in the last 30 years. In the next 30 we need to shave off 83%.
No one wants to admit they are happy to just ruin everything. So we all need to pretend we want action. But in order to prevent any action happening we need to pick different things.
The Nuclear people won't vote for solar expansion, the solar people will deny windmills work, the windmill people will refuse to condone nuclear. That way EVERYONE can claim the moral high ground AND use nice cheap, reliable coal. The same applies for everything (electric cars? No! Hydrogen!. Hydrogen? No, public transport! Public transport? No, electric cars!).