Can we, maybe, consider using fewer resources? Are we past the point of imagining that we could possibly get by with a sustainable lifestyle?
I'm not optimistic about schemes that require almost everyone to sacrifice for the common good, but which (implicitly) reward parties that cheat.
More specifically, I don't see how this would ever work at an international level, due to trade / military competition.
I think it's part of the tragedy of human nature.
And then of course there are the powerful financial incentives to not care about sustainability at all, or what's worse to spend more energy than before on products that are meant to seem sustainable (but aren't), because actual sustainable practices aren't good business on the scale of shareholder lifetimes.
Maybe it should happen, but it's a long uphill battle.
Couple of results from the top 5 when searching for this:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-electric-vehi...
https://www.virta.global/blog/myth-buster-electric-vehicles-...
Transportation in the US consumed ~27.5 quadrillion BTUs, electricity consumption was ~13.3 quadrillion BTUs, about ½ transportation use.
Humanity requires better technology to provide modern healthcare and food to everybody.
What you might be calling "human nature" is different from country to country. For instance while 5-10% of Americans are vegetarian, 30% of Indians are. Imagine the change in resource consumption if that same number applied to the U.S.
Bottom line is humans talk a big game of having more complex reasoning and and problem solving abilities compared to other, less self-aware species, but when it comes down to not mistreating the earth we at HN have a new mantra of "you can't change human nature." To me it just sounds like people throwing in the towel so they can keep consuming 80% of the world's resources.