Without singling you out, why is the suggestion always to reduce consumption as opposed to producing energy in less hostile locales? Current geopolitical events (and associated suffering) are occurring precisely because efforts to produce fossil fuels in the West have been undermined by activists pushing anti-consumption ideology.
> reducing carbon emissions is something we already understand we desperately need to do
The USA emits roughly the same amount of C02 as it did in the mid-1970s. On a per capita basis, the emissions are the lowest since at least the 1960s. This has been achieved largely due to the cost effective production of natural gas using fracking.
At the same time, US environmental regulations lead to lower emissions during production than in other nations. In other words, fossil fuels produced in the US produce less carbon than those produced in other nations.
Advocating against utilizing these energy resources has created massive geopolitical instability, harmed efforts to reduce carbon emissions globally, and inflated costs of all economic activity. Such policy is inconsistent with environmental concerns but is entirely consistent with anti-consumption ideologies.
Without singling you out, why is the suggestion always to reduce consumption as opposed to producing energy in less hostile locales? Current geopolitical events (and associated suffering) are occurring precisely because efforts to produce fossil fuels in the West have been undermined by activists pushing anti-consumption ideology.