it's important to differentiate though. climate change is largely mediopolitically-driven narrative playing into the aims of the fossil fuel industry to delay action (e.g., carbon pricing). pollution is a concrete, immediate issue that kills millions of people annually. we should be attacking pollution like a freight train, not CO₂, which is a gas that's essential to life on earth.

that would mean getting rid of coal, oil and gas as a first, and biggest, and maybe even only, step. we could have already been solving this issue if we hadn't stopped allowing nuclear to be built in the 90's, as in, we could be completely coal free by now and on the road to eliminating gas in our electricity infrastructure. then as grid-scale storage is developed over the next few decades, we could move steadily over to solar and wind over the next century (for both electricity and transportation) as the nuclear plants go out of commission at the end of their 50-70 year lifecycle.

the climate change narrative is amorphous and far in the future, so it's easy to deflect criticism and solutions. not so much with pollution, which has been a problem for over a century already. care deeply and fiercely about pollution, not CO₂.