I'll be curious to see when nations like Norway or Canada, which are hyper polluters per capita when you include their fossil fuel production and trade, will be forced to cut their lucrative oil industries in half or worse.
> The case, while not the first climate change litigation,[16] the original 2015 ruling against the Netherlands was heralded worldwide as the first successful tort action against a government to address climate change to protect human rights, an area otherwise known as climate justice.[7] The ruling on the Netherlands case led to similar climate justice lawsuits in other countries, including Belgium, France, Ireland, Germany, New Zealand, Britain, Switzerland and Norway. [11]
Hopefully there are ongoing litigations that will hold Norway liable as well.
https://www.urgenda.nl/en/themas/climate-case/global-climate...
https://peoplesclimatecase.caneurope.org/
http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-climate-change-litigation...
The most likely answer, rooted in reason, logic and an understanding of human nature, is: absolutely nobody is going to stop any of it in a way that is going to matter.
We've far since crossed the point of no return. You can take all emissions to zero in the developed world and it won't matter at all now, it won't stop anything. It's game over.
If the climate change experts are correct about how it all works, then the house is going to burn down and nothing can or will stop it, realistically. And that's a super simple - hilariously easy - extrapolation just based on one nation's hyper expanding greenhouse gas emissions alone.
It won't stop the virtue signalers however; virtue signaling is all they really have. When the plan is to not actually do anything about what's happening, then the comfort remaining is to virtue signal while you watch it all burn, because it makes one feel better.