“…Regardless of the myths about living close to the land, cities are where human beings have the lowest ecological footprint. It takes less energy, wood, material, and food to provide a good life for a person in a city than in the country. Rather than perceive the city as an ecological sink sucking up the resources of the countryside, which cities can do, cities can also be a kind of ecological ark, places where humanity gathers while we peak in population and develop ecological intelligence for a new civilization. There is wisdom in this that is rather extraordinary. It was not predicted that cities might be the best strategy for our long-term survival and well-being. Yet that is exactly what is happening.”

here’s the link:
http://www.sustainlane.com/us-city-rankings/articles/introduction-by-paul-hawken/A424DJAXRLANIR1HOAR1PS1A2C9O

Or do nothing and live with the consequences. That seems to be the path we’re on, Obama’s election notwithstanding. Live with rising sea levels, category 5 hurricanes, droughts, floods, mass extinctions, etc. After all, how many people actually get effected by these things? OK, millions. But compared to the overall population, that’s really nothing.

In all seriousness, if global warming is really the problem, geo-engineering is the only solution that will work, economically. People in China and India are not going to live in severe poverty in perpetuity, and without that, what we in the West do is almost irrelevant.