There is an old saying that 'the longest way round is the shortest way there'. I suspect that applies with climate change when political opportunists on both sides of the Atlantic are trying to avoid admitting it is a serious problem. (Trump takes matters further, calling it a hoax. That introduces an interesting concept - a hoax that gets demonstrated by observation!)
The doubters or opportunists have a triple support: 1. Many young people in particular are struggling to build adult life as it used to be. (Back in my mother's young day - the 1930s - the middle class orthodoxy was to delay marriage and family until the man - husband - was 'established'. Nowadays, with most people expecting to do multiple jobs in their career, if they can get them, that means waiting until the heat death of the universe or the Big Crunch, depending on which theory you accept.) In the case of the US there is more of the growth that economists and politicians proclaim as panacea, but it is questionable how much of that ordinary Americans ever see. 2. Thanks to the varied array of 'bad actors' on the global stage, any democracy worth its salt has to allocate more resources for defence and security. Fair comment that energy security needs to play its part, but technology alone implies analysis and judgment beyond 'drill, baby, drill' and 'net zero' slogans. 3. We still don't know what climate change is going to do - in detail. Is it going to be a smooth ride across to a warmer world, or are there going to be nasty bumps ahead, like ocean current collapse or extra methane released from permafrost? We simply don't know, especially now the forecast range is narrowed down to somewhere between catastrophe and easy does it. Business and markets hate uncertainty, and others don't like taking it seriously.
Curiously, the link few care to mention between climate change and migration (and then political instability) opens the possibility of thinking into a long way round not only to climate control, but also sustainability in general. Just imagine governments around the world having the sense to place security and defence with the environment under one head?