> Couldn't we just use our tech advancements to move to cleaner energy, move heavy industry to the moon, and clean up the planet?

How exactly? This is sci fi... how much more technology do you need? it's obviously not going in the right direction so far, we're just piling up reneweable sources on top of fossil ones. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy-by-...

What's your plan? "Hey claude scrub the entire atmosphere to remove co2 from the past 200 years, make no mistake and use no energy"? "Hey codex send all our industries with razor thin margin to the moon, make no mistake and keep them as profitable as on earth"?

Look at atmospheric co2 scrubbers, the hot new thing, we can just keep polluting and clean it up am I right? Well, let's run the numbers:

We need 1 to 3 MWh of energy to remove 1t of co2

We produced 38.1 billion tonnes of it in 2025

Global electricity production in 2025: 30 TWh

We'd need to dedicate ~100% to 300% of our electricity production to simply offset our co2 production, even if we get it 10x better, and we won't because co2 is very stable and very dilute in the atmosphere (and also because it literally is below the minimum thermodynamic work to separate CO2 from air in ideal lab conditions), it's still completely retarded.

Every single technical solution to climate change completely falls apart when you run the numbers, the only argument left is "in the future we'll invent a magical tech that will save us so we have to accelerate"... might as well pray Jesus for help at that point