I disagree. There’s only so much one man would have been able to do. After 9/11, he would have lost all buy-in from the public as the War on Terror started. Who would care about saving the planet if they are worried about terrorist attacks?
We can do two things at the same time you know. And the way industry and electrical grid changes work is over a long period of time. You move the needle at the start and the path change is dramatic.
The Kyoto Protocol would have been ratified. Could you imagine if we had an international agreement with legally-binding emissions reductions in place in 2000? The Paris Agreement is the best we have, and it’s simply not as strong as Kyoto would have been
I disagree. There’s only so much one man would have been able to do. After 9/11, he would have lost all buy-in from the public as the War on Terror started. Who would care about saving the planet if they are worried about terrorist attacks?
We can do two things at the same time you know. And the way industry and electrical grid changes work is over a long period of time. You move the needle at the start and the path change is dramatic.
The Kyoto Protocol would have been ratified. Could you imagine if we had an international agreement with legally-binding emissions reductions in place in 2000? The Paris Agreement is the best we have, and it’s simply not as strong as Kyoto would have been