I believe that one of the biggest issues with countries' fight with climate change today is the willingness of their people to do their part. Many governments see switching to more sustainable ways of living as expensive, and not directly benefiting them. If only a few countries make the switch, it won't make a big enough difference in the climate  anyway. And, unless the government is like the Chinese government or something similar where the people have more restricted personal freedoms, rolling out new environmentally friendly methods would be difficult. For example, if the United States government decided that all vehicles had to be electric or hybrid by 2030, there would be massive public outcry. People like to have the freedom to choose their own vehicle, and government intervention would not be taken well at all. But that isn't to say that total control over the country would lead to more sustainable solutions. For example, there are many companies and people living in the US that are very sustainable, or are doing as much as is feasible to reduce their footprints, while a more controlling government might prioritize production and profits over more sustainable methods in businesses. Soon the governments of the world are going to have to decide what to do, and what measures need to be taken in order to impose climate friendly regulations in each of their countries. We will have to see which system works the best, or if there needs to combination of the two different ways of governing.

This is an excellent point. I believe that the best way to slow climate change in the U.S is to use the carrot and the stick. Firstly, the government will cheapen electric cars while also building in charging stations for these electric cars in every town. After this change, the government raises taxes on fossil fuels ever so slightly, which will result in the electric car being cheaper to get and use than its predecessor. Now, new drivers would logically want the electric cars, and so the companies making cars would move swiftly to supply the demand. Cars running on natural gas would become something “old fashioned” or “loud and obnoxious” so social pressure will also provide a incentive to get electric cars. Now boom. Everyone uses electric cars within a decade or two. This method of using a reward to move people in a certain direction while indirectly punishing people for not can work in any situation, and mutes any public outcry. After all, who would complain when a cheaper, easier, and overall better system overtakes a worse one?