In a hypothetical society that might be the case. In our situation though, we have large countries like India, Indonesia and perhaps some African countries, that will need to grow their energy consumption per capita and it is unlikely that this energy will come only from renewables or nuclear. So it seems to me to that it will get worse before it will get better. It's just difficult to tell them to restrict their economic growth just because we in the west have filled the rest of the CO2 pie.

This doesn't fit the empty narrative of false hope that currently prevails. People can not accept that fact that we can not fix this within the next decades and get angry. It's like telling a cancer patient that, yes, he will die within the next few months.

It is unlikely that energy growth in India and China will be met with renewables and nuclear only because there is insufficient political will to help or force them to do so. They build coal plants because that's the cheapest option. Politics can change that.

Looking at the geopolitical trends it seems that global consensus is waning, and that is why I think it will get worse before it will get better. Humans respond to crisis better than they respond to future imagined dangers. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to improve that, and developed economies should take a lead with that. But I think the only way to make developing economies take action is if developed economies take a lead and set an example. If people in the USA and Europe drive suv's (just a silly example) you can't possibly expect India (and others) to not burn coal and other fossil fuels to electrify and industrialise their economies. We have a long way ahead of us to get out of this rut and saying that we only need political will to solve the problem makes it sound easy.