If, as some say, CO2 is or will become a problem*, we need to leave this molecule alone. Why? Because we are focusing on the "problem" not on the "solution."
So, if we want to move to a low CO2 world economy there are two indispensable things we need to get serious about:
1. An accelerated global nuclear power plant buildup. There is NO WAY out of this. NO WAY. Believing we can move to a low CO2 world economy without nuclear shouldering most of the weight is extreme reality denial.
2. We would need to stop wasting money, resources, efforts and area on solar panels / wind turbines. In REAL life these so called "renewables" need to be paired with reliable power plants in perpetuity and these reliable power plants end up producing most of the energy on an annual basis. Plus, since those pairing power plants are mostly coal or natural gas powered "renewables" just lock-in the use of fossil fuels long term. Renewable energy promoters always bring out "storage" as the eventual solution but so far, to the nearest percent, stored solar / wind energy provide 0% of world's electricity. Except for dams, storing electricity is VERY resource intensive (and thus expensive and not environmentally friendly).
Yes, efficiency and insulation can help make the economy less carbon intensive BUT it will never be enough. Primary energy consumption will continue to increase for decades to come so if we don't nuclearize it, the absolute emissions of CO2 will continue to increase.
If we want a low CO2 world economy there is NO WAY to achieve it without nuclear. NO WAY. Whoever states the opposite is a REALITY DENIER.
Feel free to add to the conversation in Twitter: @luisbaram