> The burden of "minor personal inconveniences" depends greatly on how many inconveniences you already suffer.

Excellent point, and I agree, though the vast, vast majority of the pushback I feel I get when advocating for these kinds of shifts are from wealthy/healthy individuals.

It's a classic tragedy of the commons scenario: existing resources should be able to support our current level of creature comforts with minor conservation, even if a segment of the population is less able to support the conservation efforts, but the extremes people demand in turn place extreme load on our infrastructure.

What is the point in being wealthy if it is not to avoid tedious inconveniences?