Climate change

Founders Pledge made a cause area report on climate change. They concluded that “carbon capture and storage, nuclear power, low carbon innovation, and forestry are the highest value sectors and technologies to work on. Advocacy for solar and wind and for energy efficiency are likely to be less cost-effective because they are not neglected.” For policy work, they prioritize India over the US and China, and the US and China over the EU. Their charity recommendations are the Coalition for Rainforest Nations and the Clean Air Task Force. They state that there are no consensus on those questions, and remain modest towards their findings.

GiveWell has a page on Anthropogenic climate change.

Giving What We Can has conducted a brief search for relatively effective means of reducing greenhouse emissions, focusing largely on charities. Cool Earth was evaluated as most effective among the options considered. Cool earth was estimated to reduce emissions by one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent for $0.81. However, a more recent report by Sanjay “Why we have over-rated Cool Earth explains that the initial report didn’t take into account that Cool Earth sometimes displaces logging instead of stopping it, and even then they might only be delaying it by a few years until they leave.

See Katja Grace’s first and second posts about strategies to mitigate climate change and related charities.

In their problem profiles, 80,000 Hours judges that extreme risks of climate change is less neglected than other existential risks.

One possible class of interventions against climate change is geoengineering.

See also