> You do not think the general public would be pissed off

This is a strawman and a false dichotomy often pushed by the industry:

1) choose between modern lifestyle and its ecosocial impact or go back to 1900. Other options cannot be discussed

2) make a mess (e.g. microplastics) and then blame/fine consumers for despite being overwhelmingly responsible for the decisions around industrial processes

e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10...

[as a side note, most people I know live in apartments, by choice. A lot of them have no car.]

I did not come to my conclusion due to “the industry”. I came to it from observing how people behave and what their expectations are. When people’s expectations are not met, it causes unhappiness.

I do not know any people with kids that would choose to live in apartments, or without cars. I would be surprised if there is anything more than a tiny minority (in the US) with kids that does not have a goal of living in a spacious home with backyards and garages in a nice school district.

These expectations are at odds with reducing carbon emissions. Companies being responsible for emissions is just a fiction of accounting. At the end of the day, I believe that a large portion of voters in USA would retaliate against a group of politicians that would make their lives more expensive under the guise of helping future generations and require them to give up large amounts of their quality of life.

However, it is also true that large companies get to disproportionately dump whatever feeble attempts at reducing consumption that do get enacted into consumers, such as water restrictions that affect individuals, but exempt the largest water consumers.

I guess my overall point is we need sufficient people to lower their quality of life expectations, and then that will propel the political will to make the necessary changes to force reductions in consumption.

> Companies being responsible for emissions is just a fiction of accounting.

Uh, you think Bob leaving the lights on in his house compares to operating a factory in terms of carbon emissions? I haven't seen the data and you aren't presenting any but my default assumption would definitely be that industry manufacturing and farming things at huge scale and pumping exhaust into the air by the ton is a way bigger factor than whether Bob drives a hybrid.