I have never understood the fear that many people have over the Earth potentially growing a few degrees warmer, 100 years from now. Those who are legitimately worried about this, however--especially the technically savvy--must surely be looking for solutions to this problem.
Roger Pielke, who writes at the Prometheus blog, mentions this issue on occasion as part of the blog's larger focus on improving the impact of science on public policy. I must admit, the only solution I have heard of is one also agreed to be ineffective even by its proponents: the famous Kyoto Protocol.
A quick google search on "stopping global warming" does not enlighten me further. Of the front 10 pages, 9 of them implicitly assume that the only road to decreasing the Earth's temperature is the Kyoto strategy of reducing energy use. Only one page of those ten has any alternative specified: a giant solar shield in orbit around the Earth.
Perhaps the UN's Framework Convention on Climate Change can provide an answer? Well, they at least provide one alternative, only to immediately dismiss it: increase the coverage of forest area. That's an interesting idea -- I wonder why they do not mention other plant forms such as sea plankton as a potential way to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? Or, of course, other mechanisms that don't rely on reducing carbon dioxide at all?
Is this all that our scientists and technological leaders have come up with? Has no one tried, for example, to develop an environmentally friendly compound that could be added to the atmosphere to reduce the greenhouse effect? Do any techies actually take this problem seriously?
I'll post anything I find, but it looks like slim pickings. The political brawl is drowning out the voices of anyone legitimately trying to help.