[standardUser]

That's a false premise, not to mention incredibly de-motivating and unhelpful. We can slow current trends and dramatically delay the negative impacts of climate change without having to eradicate every last ICE on the planet (to name just one hopelessly radical and unrealistic part of a fantasy world with literally zero carbon emission). And slowing the current trends should be the goal, both because it is sufficient and, perhaps more importantly, because it is plausible.

[adrianN]

I of course mean net emissions. We can tolerate a sizeable chunk of carbon emissions if we also sequester the carbon back.

[standardUser]

That's an important point, and I think those points should be included more when we communicate about these ideas, because it's very easy to turn people off when we imply that we need to decommission all classic cars or ban camp fires or end air travel.