I think it's difficult for our political systems to translate this collective global understanding, of the urgency we're in, into the aggressive kind of action commensurate with solving the crisis - since a lot of it means changing the basics of how and where we live.

Pictured: the US's approach to climate change.

Are we taking polls seriously again and if so why?

1: Most of the global "we" don't live in a nice house in a mostly-functional city in an already-developed country with a long-matured political economy. Most live in shitty buildings in shitty cities with impossible traffic, terrible air quality and exploding economies. Most are young, most can vote, and those who can't are feared by their rulers. None of which is to say their opinions are sufficient to solve the problem, but they are necessary, and the evidence is cause for optimism.

I was mostly thinking of the global North with my "we", honestly.

they are necessary, and the evidence is cause for optimism.

Agreed. China outputs more greenhouse gases than the US. That trend's only going to accelerate. India's behind but that might not always be the case, and Africa should get its shot at industrializing. Noah Smith made a case for a rosy future where the industrializing poor world agrees to go all in on renewable energy now and the rich world promises to go all in on direct air carbon capture as soon as it's possible at scale, which'll be a little while. It'd be a way to make up for us rich countries getting an unfair headstart with our highly polluting industrializations. Of course, why the heck would you trust rich countries to do right things in the future, so we should send money promoting green industrialization now. And that just isn't going to happen, or at least not at the necessary scale.

Whatever way we go, it's easier if polities in the poor world have some perception this is a problem before, say, a major coastal city sinks permanently under the waves.

6: I think I read last week that the only operating Carbon Capture plant had shut down. It was sufficiently depressing that I immediately forgot where it is, etc.

The "presentism" problem is real. I'm enough of a geezer to remember really cold weather (freezing or below for a long period) when I was a kid in Maryland, and when I was an undergraduate in Massachusetts (where single-digit high temps were common in winter, and below zero was relatively common). My kids have never seen that. They have an intellectual understanding that it's warmer, but didn't live with the old status quo. I know some ornithologists who will point out, based on the migration times of birds, that Spring arrives about a month earlier than it did in Thoreau's time, and Fall lasts about a month longer. I can comprehend that but I didn't experience it.

I don't know how one combats presentism.

The carbon capture plant was the only one in the US, attached to a coal power plant in Texas; it had been running for a few years but became uneconomical with the fossil fuel price crash. There are other capture plants running elsewhere in the world on newer designs. I think the Texas one had to run off its own natural-gas fired power source, which defeats the purpose a bit. It's a live endeavor but it's going to be slow.

Noah Smith made a case for a rosy future where the industrializing poor world agrees to go all in on renewable energy now and the rich world promises to go all in on direct air carbon capture as soon as it's possible at scale

Did he say this recently? I thought cheaper solar was making it seem more and more feasible for industrialized countries to make that switch faster.

"the Texas one had to run off its own natural-gas fired power source"
Sounds efficient!

Walking on snow makes a very distinct sound when it gets below ten or so. Kids today don't much know that.

"Africa should get its shot at industrializing."

Africa is not being stopped from industrialising by carbon emissions limits!