Gradually lowering greenhouse gas emissions would be worthwhile were all states to join in the effort, but absent such strong, broad-based action, countries should explore other means of limiting harm from climate change.

Although it creates only a slight reduction in the amount of solar energy absorbed by the Earth, solar radiation management should be a part of U.S. climate policy.

Though efforts to reduce global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have faltered, there do exist other climate policy options that may offer timely and relatively cheap methods for offsetting some of the harmful effects of climate change.

A critical step in reducing greenhouse gas emissions is the introduction of new technologies for energy supply and use.

The real problem with congressional greenhouse gas legislation.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 is an ambitious attempt to meet the very real challenges posed by greenhouse gases.

Real progress on climate policy will require many, many decades.

The trade-off between the goal of protecting the environment and that of preserving prosperity lies at the heart of making good policy on climate change.

Research suggests that institutions limit the extent to which efficient policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are likely to be adopted.

Geoengineering could be one of the very best ways of hedging against the larger risks and uncertainties that surround climate policy.

Emission controls are not going to have much impact until a new generation of vastly cheaper technologies becomes available and matures, but in the meantime, geoengineering may offer some help.

Is there a viable alternative to the Kyoto Protocol?

Geoengineering could be one of the very best ways of hedging against the larger risks and uncertainties that surround climate policy.

Emission controls are not going to have much impact until a new generation of vastly cheaper technologies becomes available and matures, but in the meantime, geoengineering may offer some help.