You're not wrong – and if the fossil fuel industry could magically cure the climate crisis (which they keep pretending to via CCS pipedreams etc), that might be the same.

But neither industry has invested in remedying the harms they've caused, right?

Would you want or expect big tobacco to cure lung cancer? Why should fossil fuel companies be any different?

But there's a deeper question behind this too: Do we want the oligopolistic, exploitative industry that has done the most to cause the climate crisis, that has a history bundled up in war, colonialism, & human rights violations to have a big stake in the renewable energy future?

Fiiiiiiine

52/🚨The Court then delivers a powerful statement: failure of a state to take appropriate action to regulate fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel licences, fossil fuel subsidies may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that state

20/ The Court notes in particular the relevance of customary norms related to:
🔹duty to prevent significant harm to the environment
🔸duty to cooperate internationally!
👉 These norms are going to be critical to the responses of the Court to the questions before it.