Planet saving for non-gen reasons

One big rationale given by climate change-worriers is that it is morally wrong to leave the planet behind to subsequent generations in a state that resembles, to quote Donald Trump in a very different context, 'a shithole'. It is a powerful argument that puts the onus of setting things right - or, at least attempting damage control, on us, humans who currently exist, rather than leaving dirty and ripped laundry for the yet-to-come to deal with. But what happens when humans are childless, which more people are opting for, or are for ironically physio-environmental reasons? At some point, perhaps, literally not being a parent or grandparent - being the latter is, come to think of it, impossible without being the former - may slide into metaphorical thinking that there is no one to leave this planet to, at least among our species.

Two options may well appear in the not-so-distant future. One, a devil-may-care attitude - not climate-change denial - that has 'going down with the ship' as its kamikaze philosophy. It's alluring since there is no trans-generational guilt, no 'original sin' as a future heirloom. The other option would be to ensure that other future Earthlings - non-human life - who will continue to reproduce don't become collateral. Frankly, the second one would be a more constructive, Earthly reaction.