It's part of a narrative to blame consumers for causing climate change, meanwhile industry pollutes far more. The pollution reduction per unit effort is much higher if you focus on heavy industry.
True, but "ignore personal action and rail at industry" is part of another narrative that is probably still less effective at changing industry.
If you find a polity where consumers are not taking individual action to address climate change, you will find it is not applying more pressure on industry or politicians than a polity where consumers are taking individual action. If you attack the individuals who are taking action, you are attacking the political base that would support addressing climate change. Convincing them that their efforts are pointless, silly, and perhaps just vanity or arrogance, does not empower them. Industry is not quaking in its boots at the prospect that people will accuse all the composters and recyclers of virtue signaling and hypocrisy.
The crux of the problem is the costs we allow to be externalized and the arduous legal process involved in getting a small fraction of the real damages paid. You shouldn't need a lawsuit to make a company pay for every penny of damage they did.
Its a paywalled article, but you are correct that carbon credits and net-zero have excluded methane because of its wonderful smell :)
"Long-awaited" means exactly zero has been implemented. Perhaps "the new net-zero", similar to soda marketing is in order.