Whatever "the solution" in the end may be, we can all play our part. Individual, company or government.
Personally, I feel it's both wrong and harmful to play up feelings of "government should leave things to tech". That was never at play, in terms of working out a solution.
>Maybe after all that time we can start looking to other means to help address the issue rather keeping trying to alter it with legislation
The issue isn't being altered. Are you perhaps trying to say you think it's bad that the governments regulate what companies can do on their territory?
It makes perfect sense to fine companies that come onto the territory you own and are responsible for, when those companies pollute said territory.
Fining indeed doesn't solve the problem directly. It does offer a chance for reflection and study on the side of the companies.
The problem isn't that the government is trying to protect its territory and its people. The problem is that companies continue harming the environment despite the knowledge that this eventually kills people, animal and plant life.
What you're saying sounds a lot like the rethoric of "Don't fine us because we're not going to listen anyway". Which is downright evil.
>Of course even if the entire USA went carbon nuetral tomorrow it wouldn't do much because the biggest contributer to CO2 emissions right now is China at almost 2x what the US producing.
Respectfully, that is complete and utter bullshit. The impact would be gigantic.
It's not because there's still more to fix, that this means one action won't fix anything. That's absurd.
Also, the idea of "going carbon neutral tomorrow" is a strawman. A total exaggeration meant to portray the plans of one side as impossible. While those are not actually the plans to begin with.
Your entire post feels like anti-government propaganda.