research program into geoengineering options like those discussed in the previous chapter is therefore prudent and, as I’ve noted, the intense monitoring of the earth system that would be a first step in that research program would, in any event, also improve our understanding of the climate system.

Finally, should there be significant deterioration of the global climate, from whatever cause, humanity would be well served to know whether deliberate intervention into the climate system (geoengineering) is a plausible strategy.

Another prudent step would be to pursue adaptation strategies more vigorously. Adaptation can be effective.

I believe the socio-technical obstacles to reducing CO2 emissions make it likely that human influences on the climate will not be stabilized, let alone reduced, in this century. If the effects of those influences become more evident and more severe than they have been to date, of course, the balance of costs and benefits might shift, and society

And for me, the many certain downsides of mitigation outweigh the uncertain benefits: the world’s poor need growing amounts of reliable and affordable energy, and widespread renewables or fission are currently too expensive, unreliable, or both.

Particularly promising here is the use of information-based approaches to transportation (such as suggesting more efficient routes for a trip or better monitoring and control of engine performance) and building operations (such as turning down the heating or cooling in unoccupied rooms).

Small modular fission reactors, improved solar technologies, and, in the longer term, nuclear fusion are all promising areas of research, as is how to economically store massive amounts of electricity on the grid.

A third “easy” step toward reducing emissions is further research and development in emissions-lite technologies.

Cost-effective efficiencies that lead to emissions reductions are also low-hanging fruit, particularly when there are side benefits.