If we can postpone the problem by decades, I would consider that a huge win. Maybe we could control fusion by then. Also, nuclear plays fairly well with renewab

If we can postpone the problem by decades, I would consider that a huge win. Maybe we could control fusion by then. Also, nuclear plays fairly well with renewable energy sources, many of which are also getting cheaper (especially solar). If we take global warming serously, I see absolutely no reason that we should continue to burn coal, except that it is a bit cheaper than nuclear given the current safety regulations for nuclear. Let's agree to ban coal, and then we can discuss to what extent we should add nuclear energy capacity to replace at least some of it. As for reducing the population, I'm curious about how exactly you think we could achieve that?