Not everywhere has hydro-electric or solar power opportunities.
This is a standard mantra of the fossil fuel apologists ... which is obviously not true.
Everybody, without any exception, can do something on the reduction of the global warming and mitigation of its adverse effects - everybody, without any exception, both personally and as public initiative.
What about awareness and educating a little bit ... in math optimisation, for example. What is the idea of burning promiscuously fossil fuels by the cargo vessels (5% of the world emissions of CO2) and then spending billions on making energy-efficient robotised rotor ships that will spray nano-water particles into the cumulo-nimbus clouds to make them brighter in order to reflect better the heat from the sun?
The problem is that with the issues of the climate change are dealing totally inappropriate scientists. No-one can solve a problem by dealing with the consequences. If somebody wants to start solving the problems perhaps he should start dealing with the causes. What about reducing the CO2 emissions, in the first place? What about making energy-efficient robotised rotor ships as cargo vessels for marine transportation of goods ... and skipping the rest part of the exercise about the 'mitigation of the effect'?
The key is in the misrepresentation of the things. Some people cannot stop repeating that it is impossible to stop digging the tar sands in Canada and Madagascar to infinity, and that it is impossible to stop excavating promiscuously the Gobi desert ... and leaving burning hell after that. What about collecting the CO2 and recycling it with water & solar into CH4 (for fuel)? Everybody can do this in the back yard with an appropriate apparatus, but some people are afraid of losing the control & the monopoly on the energy - that is the real problem.