> I would not be making such claims with a global recession and wars increasingly prevalent. A lot of legislation around clean energy may be pushed aside for economic or security purposes.

The economics of renewables are favorable in comparison to fossil fuels, even when you remove all subsidies. What makes them appear more expensive today is that the infrastructure for fossil energy carriers is already there, the one for renewables is often just being built. Obviously there is a tipping point somewhere in the future. Unfortunatly, time is the one thing we don't have.

> What makes 1.5C key? Why not 2C [1]? And is this normalised for background rise vs actual rise?

The Wikipedia link you provided alludes to the reasoning why 1.5 °C are key. The article also links to a longer piece by the IPC explaining the reasoning.

> The earth's temperature has risen fast in the past too [2].

True, the changes in temperature earth has experienced over the last 500 millions years are vastly larger than 2 °C. Only 400 millions years ago oceans were hot baths with a thriving ecosphere! From this vantage point the "there is no planet B" slogan seems less clever, agreed. Climate change will not end earth or nature in general, both will be fine. It will just end the living conditions in which humanity can thrive or even survive.

> By far the most environmentally friendly thing to do currently is to keep existing vehicles running for longer, until they are eventually traded for something more efficient. I'm yet to be convinced that these EV batteries will serve out the 10 years they claim and they also have a higher emissions for manufacturing.

There are 10-year old EV on the road today. Their batteries are still working. Even so, recycling batteries is possible and on the verge of economic feasibility. There are numerous service providers and some say there is going to be big money in it. According to Argonne's GREET model the break-point, where an EV shows a smaller overall environmental footprint versus an ICEV, is somewhere around the 20000km mark [1][5]. The environmental damage caused by an ICEV over its lifetime therefore exceeds the damage caused by an EV and it becomes worse the longer the ICEV runs. Maybe cars in general are just not the ideal solution if reducing environmental damage is the priority? I don't know. Anyhow, considering that driving ICE cars is not banned anywhere, you can go this route. Some nations have banned admitting new ICEs, but that is not the same.

> They are also only as environmentally friendly as the energy generation which is continuously under threat and very difficult to scale without significant investment.

That is actually a strength of EV. Any improvement in electricty generation and distribution is immediatly applicable to EV. And it is not hard, only expensive in terms of money. But drilling oil wells, building nuclear power plants, or coal mines is also expensive in terms of money, so what? I do not understand the remark concerning threats. How is renewable energy any more threatened than fossil fuels?

> That said, if you really want to make a dent, start tackling the shipping industry rather than the individual. This is where we make big changes quickly [3]. The emissions from these ships is also likely directly acidifying our oceans too.

This is a worthwhile target. But 1) why only do one or the other if we can do both? And 2) shipping may be causing significant damage, but there are relativly few ships around (around 100000 [2]). You get scaling effects far beyond the effect of more environmental friendly shipping when you tackle the billion+ cars on this planet, too [3].

> Then put in some regulation/tax regarding the import of materials or goods from countries that do not have good emissions standards. This would force Countries like China to clean up their act and stop Countries outsourcing their carbon emissions.

That's a good idea! Let's see how the CBAM works out. It goes into effect in January 2024. [4]

[1] https://www.anl.gov/topic/greet
[2] https://unctad.org/publication/handbook-statistics-2022
[3] https://hedgescompany.com/blog/2021/06/how-many-cars-are-the...
[4] https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustme...
[5] Found this later: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-d...