Raw LLM Responses

> The Paris treaty is non-binding and even if it was, it's not enough. That's true. >World leaders only care about the rich people who keep them in power. I'd also agree mostly with that. More specifically not just rich people, but those power structures that have established themselves and protect their profits. >Even if Biden does all the right things on climate change, I highly doubt he will be able to convince China and many other nations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. I disagree on that. The more nations are willing to work towards a global solution, the more pressure there is on those, that may resist. With the US bearing the [largest responsibility](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(20)30196-0/fulltext) for the accumulated CO2 from fossil fuel burning in the atmosphere, it is an important signal if they lead the effort and aim for ambitious goals. That makes it much easier to convince others to do their share. I am also convinced, that it is wrong to think of the work on the transitioning towards a carbonfree economy as a liability only. It is the biggest opportunity to secure future economic prosperity. >Let's face it, the world will do nothing about climate change. This is where I have the largest disagreement. While the political goals are all fairly lacking and we are mostly incapable to consider anything but highest profits, some progress has been made already. And we are now finally at a point, where we have a real chance to turn around. Not because we could get our act together and decide to do something and save our habitat, but because we pushed renewable energies to the point, where they outcompete fossil fuels. This will eliminate the fossil fuels from our energy production. The main question there is how fast we can make that. The [IEA thinks](https://www.iea.org/reports/sustainable-recovery/a-sustainable-recovery-plan-for-the-energy-sector#abstract) that, depending on the measures we