Full decarbonization can't in any sense be considered an intermediate solution, because there's not even a small working example of it anywhere in the world or any plausible proposal to get from here to there on the timescale we need to avoid disaster.
I agree, but progressively moving to renewables is not full decarbonization either.
Energy production is not the only source of emissions:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emiss...
And even if it was, best case scenario it will take a couple of decades to switch away from fossil fuels.
> there's not even a small working example of it anywhere in the world or any plausible proposal to get from here to there on the timescale we need to avoid disaster
Yes but we are in uncharted territory. We don't know how to do it but humanity has to find a way and fracking is certainly not part of where we need to go.
The sensible decision would have been to invest in renewables instead of fracking. Fracking has been a total waste of money even ignoring all the environmental problems it is causing.
James Hansen talked to congress about climate change in the 80s, it's not like this is a new issue.
https://twitter.com/CarbonBrief/status/1209025851343413248
We need extreme radical measures now. This tiny effect that happens to have occurred despite not changing anything about the fundamental logic of our economy and our relationship to energy is nothing to pat ourselves on the back about.
We're already past 2ºC if you consider climate lag, aerosols cooling, and feedbacks.
See this comment of mine from a couple of months ago with links and such: