
Even if we set our global net emissions to 0 right now it’s not gonna get colder again in our lives or the lives of the next 100 generations. The carbon was in the ground, we burnt it, now it’s in the atmosphere as co2. To get it back down, we need negative net emissions aka co2 recapture.
And needless to say, getting our global net emissions anywhere close to 0 isn’t even really in reach for the next 50 years, so if we can do recapture alongside reducing emissions that would probably be great. Particularly in the wealthy western nations that might reach at least nominal net 0 at some point in this century.














If my understanding of the legislative EU process is somewhat correct, this effectively leaves it up to the countries to decide (as EU laws just mean that countries have to pass a law enacting it).
It’s not rare to phrase laws this way in germany at least. It’s not necessarily bad, as it allows court interpretation to change alongside societal values. In this case it would likely lead to only some countries actually passing mass surveillance laws (it’s pretty unambiguously unconstitutional in a bunch, which makes it clear that mass surveillance is not “reasonable”. Not that that always stops legislators, but it would at least die before the highest court eventually).
So we still need to fight it, because it’s the first line of defense. Really what we need to push for would likely be explicitly disallowing blanket scanning of communication on the EU level, or proposals like this will happen again and again.