Techniques other than prison can make a big difference (bolding is mine):

A second, complementary approach that has historically not been part of the public debate is to help young people navigate the difficult situations that our past policies have failed to fix.

Consider an exercise practiced in one of Chicago’s most effective violence intervention programs, Becoming a Man (BAM). Teens are paired up; one is given a rubber ball, and the other is given 30 seconds to get the ball out of his partner’s fist. Inevitably, the two teens end up on the ground, wrestling and fighting to get – or keep – the ball.

After the teens switch roles and the same struggle occurs, the BAM counselor asks why no one just asked their partner for the ball. They usually look surprised and say something along the lines of, “The other guy would have thought I’m a wuss.” The counselor asks the partner if that’s true. The usual answer: “No, I would have given it to him. It’s just a stupid ball.”

This exercise, called “the fist,” doesn’t teach participants to be better people. Instead, it gives them the tools they need to address the actual problem: the situation. By teaching young people to slow down during stressful situations, it helps them navigate in-the-moment decisions that could otherwise lead to violence.

About 2,200 words: https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/23/opinions/surprising-solution-to-gun-violence-ludwig/index.html.

And good news from Fix the News:

The global energy transition will cost a lot less than we think 
With estimates ranging from $3 trillion to $12 trillion, the cost to green the world’s economy can seem inconceivable but The Economist argues the cost will actually be closer to $1 trillion annually – or 1% of global GDP. Most analysts overestimate energy demand and underestimate technological advances.

An archived copy of The Economist‘s article is here. Important paragraph:

First, the scenarios being costed tend to involve absurdly speedy (and therefore expensive) emissions cuts.

Second, they assume that the population and economy of the world, and especially of developing countries, will grow implausibly rapidly, spurring pell-mell energy consumption.

Third, such models also have a record of severely underestimating how quickly the cost of crucial low-carbon technologies such as solar power will fall.

Fourth and finally, the estimates disgorged by such modelling tend not to account for the fact that, no matter what, the world will need to invest heavily to expand energy production, be it clean or sooty. Thus the capital expenditure needed to meet the main goal set by the Paris agreement—to keep global warming “well below” 2°C—should not be considered in isolation, but compared with alternative scenarios in which rising demand for energy is met by dirtier fuels.