But this is a perfect way to make money by green labeling."use ours because we save you 20% electricity" so therefore our brands are creating less ghgs.
This sounds like consumerism with extra steps to me, since emissions are mostly coming from industry, not individuals.
A lot of carbon has to be emitted for the manufacturing and distribution of goods and a lot of the time it exceeds their lifetime energy consumption (and its equivalent carbon emission).
Best case scenario would be making goods more modular and reliable, so it doesn't need replacement as soon, and making it so older ones can be updated or at least mantained for longer.
e: I'm not even considering material cost and extraction.
True. But we also do need to manufacture a lot. Renewables, batteries, insulation, hobs and heaters, probably houses too. Unless you want everyone to live without heat and electricity.
The best bet it government spending on public transport and communities and the reduction in work hours. That will make people do more instead of spend more.
Probably. By the time legislators get on board, it'll be way too late. It's already too late, but it'll be too late to avoid even the most disastrous consequences.
I've heard it said many times. There are no silver bullets to climate change. Many solutions have to be researched, discovered, developed, and implemented.