There are several ways of answering this. I suppose one is look at your kids. How much are they worth to you? Because that really is the question you are asking. Now I will get to other answers later, because your questions are perfectly legitimate. But I really want to make clear what you are asking. Inaction now (and I do mean as a society as much as individuals), even under the optimistic predictions, condemns our children to a much harder life than we consider acceptable now. This is not rhetoric. This is what really underlies our choice. You and I will probably be able to avoid too many ill effects. But food shortages, refugee crises of unprecedented proportions, spikes in tropical diseases, more Katrina-level disasters...these are part of what we face if nothing is done. Let's make that clear because this isn't spotted owls we are talking about. Its our kids.

Now, that aside, you are perfectly right that it is hard to find solutions we can fit into our lives and budgets. But, this still in some ways ducks the question. I will more directly answer your question anyway in a minute, but first let me get one more point out of the way.

You are right that the response must be as a society as well as individuals. But we are parts of that society. We are the ones who have to generate the needed changes. So look at your kids and think about the future you want for them, then start lobbying your local, state and Federal politicians to make sure your kids get that future. Lobby corporations as well. Many ARE making some really needed changes. Probably faster than government and individuals are. Finding companies that are making these changes and patronizing them will be a big help. But lobbying government is critical if we want societal changes. Iowa has taken some pretty major steps towards changing their energy policy. In John and Teresa Heinz Kerry's book, Appendix A (which I haven't read yet!) seems to be John Kerry's proposal for an energy policy. When the book comes out, get it (buy or library) and take note of that appendix. Start lobbying for it, because without us pushing for it it won't happen. So even if the main changes are societal, that doesn't let us as individuals off the hook.

Now what can we do as individuals. Well, remind yourself of what is at stake, and consider how much you will put into it because many options do cost money. One exception that I sure hope everyone already has done is switching to compact fluorescent bulbs. The initial cost is high but you rapidly gain it back and then some in savings. In the long run you save LOTS of money and LOTS of energy. It is a bare minimum and is no real sacrifice.

Recycling really is a big one, though depends partly on what is being recycled. Recycling metals is HUGELY beneficial. Recycling bottles may not be. But more important is purchasing recycled products to create the market. Far more often than it should that costs extra.

There are other ways you can save environmentally as well as saving money, though most of us hesitate or do them only half-assed because they are a pain in the ass. A one or two degree change in your thermastat (colder in winter, warmer in the summer) can save you money and reduce emissions. But your comfort level is affected. Up to you. Current comfort vs. some savings and helping your children's comfort to a much larger degree 30 years from now. Related kinds of inconvenient ways you can both save money and the environment are cutting back on some things. Meat, coffee, cocoa, tea, tobacco all are major parts of the problem. You can find alternatives that are green (I can suggest alternative, green sources for all except tobacco) but they cost more. Cutting them out of your life or reducing them saves you money and helps the environment. I think few of us are willing to give up on all and many can't afford green versions. I do my best with green versions for all except tobacco (we don't smoke, so not a problem) and we are only half assed with meat. Can't always afford the better versions. But, don't ignore the fact that these are options, no matter how inconvenient, where saving money and the environment can go hand in hand. Personally I am not that ascetic, so I shell out some extra money to do better when I can and don't do as well as I'd like when I can't.

Anything else I suggest to you would cost you some money either a large initial expense with later savings (e.g. insulation) or just plain costs you money. Again, it all is up to you what the future is worth. I can give you links to purchase your energy through green energy sources. Really by doing this yo aren't really purchasing green energy so much as expanding the market for green energy. But you can, for probably less than a dollar more a month...it varies...create that market for green energy. One person I know swears he saved money. We didn't notice much difference when we switched.

Then there is carbon offsetting. All of this is controversial but better than nothing and is something individuals can do. Offsetting carbon usage through one source cost something like $12 per month (if I remember correctly) for offsetting basic use. Offsetting cars and travel are somewhat more. You can offset either by helping build green energy or by planting trees. The effectiveness of both vary and contain some controversies, but still better than nothing. I don't do official offsetting, but I do pay to preserve forest and plant trees when I can. I do a regular tree planting thing for my son's birthday every year.

And so on. You do what you can do and pressure society to make the changes it needs to change. That's all you can do. But we always do have to keep in mind that we aren't doing this for spotted owls, whales and whopping cranes. We are doing it for our own. That makes a big difference to me because I am quite afraid of what my son will face and I have to do what I can for him.