RE:RE:RE:If rich countries, do not do anything to fight emissionsExactly, no government wants to say this but yes the driver is the population. Technlogy will not be a solution for a long time because efficiency gains are too slow. For example there are twice as many people living now then when I was born. There is no way to generate 50% of carbon emissions, even if we did we would be exactly where we were in 70's. But the whole problem will solve itself in a way. We know population of China started contracting about 2017 (no reliable data but there is secondary data from mandatory vaccination orders that points to much lower birth rates). This is contrary to Chinese official data by about ten years vs projected maximum. The same goes for overall global population with official UN projection now widely recognized as overestimatin the population growth. Result is we will reach peak population much sooner ~2080 and will be contracting by 2100. The ammount of money thrown into the energy transition is basically a missalocation of tax revenue resources. Don't get me wrong, tne new tech/energy is beneficial and will very usefull but currently at best it will diversify the energy mix, Sweeden is a good example where over 50% of new cars bought are EVs yet this dd not result in proportional fossil fuel use reduction, scarce resources were just now used for other purposes simply. There is a great book on population trends by two Canadian authors "the empty planet". I really hate that the whole topic is not open to debate but treated as religious dogma. If you don't agree you are cast away as a heretic of sorts. This is science and should be open to debate by its very nature. I also hate how people on the opposite side are made fun of with statements that are disrespectfull such as, this is so simple even a child can understand it. I really would love to see a kid that can show me ho to determine a carbon foot print of anything. Most of these calculations are estimates because we just don't know the whole system and so they largely depend on where you draw the box around a specific item of interest. The stimates are so bad that for countries like India and China the carbon foot print has an error of as much as 30%, for EU, Canada and US as much as 10%. To make global policy decisions based on such bad data is pure insanity. Stinks of welth transfer if I was into conspiracy theories :).