The technology we do have is not net-zero impact either. It takes energy to make electric cars and the batteries to run them, solar panels, wind mills, etc. The batteries weigh a lot, they're expensive to produce, and environmentally hazardous to dispose of. Wind mills... huge cost to build. They rarely produce energy when it's actually needed. You can't base load with them. If it weren't for tax payer subsidies they'd be DOA. When they break down they're an eye sore, and they're also expensive to maintain. Ever see the ones in CA with oil streaming down the sides? Bet that's great for the environment. Solar panels are a little better, but even then they degrade over time, also cost a lot to produce and maintain, and have a substantial environmental impact on the disposal side. So yeah, they certainly have an agenda that has absolutely nothing to do with preserving the environment. Economic starvation is one possible explanation. However, I'm inclined to believe they'd just like to keep receiving funding to solve a problem that doesn't exist. An attempt to create an industry off of bogus assumptions. Plus what better cause to get behind for a politician than one that never existed in the first place? You get a blank check to solve a problem and you spend it however you see fit. Decades down the road when there's no problem you can be the hero.