> Every new fossil energy project is incompatible with a world that takes climate change seriously. Money talks.

This depends on more information. It’s unlikely we’ll be using zero fossil fuels in 35 years. So the goal is to reduce over time, so a new project today could be replacing an old project going offline.

Or perhaps the project has a transition path to do something else.

I don’t think these are pedantic clarifications as things aren’t fatalistic. Investors are rational and while money talks it doesn’t mean that all the billions put into these projects isn’t a waste in climate terms.