> "The problem with decarbonization is that there isn’t any low hanging fruit."
Sadly, the problem with decarbonization is that it doesn't matter if there is or isn't "low hanging fruit", because even if it was all "low hanging fruit", too much of humanity will fight to the bloody end to avoid taking action on any of it for fear that they'll have to A) admit that we've really fucked up, and B) they'll have to alter their life in some small inconvenient way that they'll blow way outta proportion to make it seem like some massive world-ending inconvenience.
The other commenter may not have demonstrated any low hanging fruit, but I would say that there is still plenty of that:
• PV is approximately the cheapest electricity available, and not yet saturated in summer daytime
• BEVs have lower lifetime costs and emissions than ICE vehicles
• Not all homes are as insulated as they can be
• Given how cheap food is (and that the government subsidises and regulates it anyway), relatively modest updates can reduce methane emissions even without population dietary changes
And all that's assuming zero new tech. Vat grown meat is aiming for lower emissions, not just ethical benefits; there are efforts to produce low (and zero) emission steel and concrete.
The trouble is, the necessary reductions are around 99.9%, so we need more than just the combination of all the existing and near-term low-hanging fruit, we need all bar one of the apples in all the trees in the garden.
Sadly, the problem with decarbonization is that it doesn't matter if there is or isn't "low hanging fruit", because even if it was all "low hanging fruit", too much of humanity will fight to the bloody end to avoid taking action on any of it for fear that they'll have to A) admit that we've really fucked up, and B) they'll have to alter their life in some small inconvenient way that they'll blow way outta proportion to make it seem like some massive world-ending inconvenience.