It actually makes a great deal of difference. Every ton of CO2 we put in the atmosphere will stay there for thousands of years. We desperately need to stop digging the hole we are in any deeper.
We also need to stop using methane, like RIGHT NOW. I know the Davos crowd spent a lot of money setting up Natural Gas as the "bridge fuel" they could cash in on for another 20-30 years, but that cannot be allowed to stand.
We will crash our civilization for 100% certain if we build up to much methane in the atmosphere. We need governmental efforts to shut down methane usage as soon as humanly possible.
Getting off methane would make a huge difference. Proposals to do that should be on ballots in every country in the world.
We need to be ramping up to wartime production levels of renewables and getting projects in place as fast as crews can build them. We have to build out enough to match our current generating capacity, then that amount again to power our EV's, then that amount again to provide air conditioning for places that will soon have 100 degree weather 6 months of the year, and then finally that amount again to power vertical farms to replace the agricultural output we are going to lose from the changing climate.
How we respond will make the difference between ending up in 2150 with a stable population of 2-3 billion and civilizational continuity. Or a global population of a few hundred million living lives as hunter gatherers in the ruins of a past they remember only vaguely.
Managed retreat is infinitely preferable to uncontrolled collapse.
BTW: I read your piece and found it insightful. You clearly have a wealth of experience reporting on the energy sector. I'm not sure I agree with your final point.
It might push an energy transition ahead more rapidly in Europe but the rest of the world? I'm unconvinced. The fracture in the world order signals that there is not going to be unity in our response to the crisis at the time when high levels of cooperation and trust are crucial.
The thing that the "first world" seems unable to accept is that this is an "all or nothing" problem. Decarbonizing their economies will not save them if the other 75% of the world continues to burn fossil fuels because the costs of transitioning are prohibitive.
Unfortunately the small window of opportunity we had to manage this gracefully seems to be closing.
