A reduction in choices because of circumstances is central to the idea of tyranny of circumstances. Yet, one of the best ways to reduce the speed at which these circumstances is to consciously decide to make that change itself. For example, nations that promote the more expensive renewable energy formats are providing greater opportunities for ensuring greater number of choices in the future. In the alternate scenario, a nation may choose to eschew the opportunity for renewable formats and exhaust all available fossil fuels before switching. While in the short term this may provide a lower-cost for the system, but the immediate change that will be needed to ensure that energy needs can be met by this novel system that hadn’t been explored in this scenario may be incredibly expensive in the long term. Artificially reducing these options may provide the onus for innovation and improvements necessary to ensure that there is good improvement for those who must follow. Yet at the current moment, political will may not be at the point to push through these policies that provide structures for reductionism. This is ultimately the lynchpin in the plan for creating sustainable development, because they are often the more expensive option, and they create winners and loser, and the losers are often the people that helped get the policymaker into the position that they enjoy currently.