We encourage you to republish this article online and in print, it’s free under our creative commons attribution license, but please follow some simple guidelines:
  1. You have to credit our authors.
  2. You have to credit SciDev.Net — where possible include our logo with a link back to the original article.
  3. You can simply run the first few lines of the article and then add: “Read the full article on SciDev.Net” containing a link back to the original article.
  4. If you want to also take images published in this story you will need to confirm with the original source if you're licensed to use them.
  5. The easiest way to get the article on your site is to embed the code below.
For more information view our media page and republishing guidelines.

The full article is available here as HTML.

Press Ctrl-C to copy

If you are unable to listen to this audio, please update your browser or click here to download the file [8MB].  

Carbon dioxide is the main driver of global warming, but it doesn’t act alone. Pollutants such as methane and soot also play a part, although they have very different impacts from CO2.
While CO2 lingers in the atmosphere, the so-called short-lived pollutants mostly disappear within weeks — or a few years at most.
Targeting policies at phasing out short-lived pollutants such as methane or soot can improve human health in places where people still burn kerosene for cooking and lighting. But this risks diverting resources away from efforts to reduce CO2 emissions, which will irreparably damage the planet in the long term. 
Which category should policymakers focus on mitigating first? In this audio piece, two experts with different points of view examine the dilemma.