The conservative thing to do is to gather data before making trillion-dollar changes to the global economy, while spending money on moderate cost green energy research (but not billion-dollar ethanol mandates).
The idea that investing in alternative energy and the like will cost jobs or even lives is total bunk. If we can create a market around things we don't need (like gourmet potato chips) then we can create a market around things we do need, like clean air and water.
The biggest reason for this is France which generates the majority of its power (80%+) from nuclear power stations.
The environmentalists were extremely successful in the 70ies and 80ies to ensure that the USA does not use nuclear power. Since then their coal power stations have done untold damage to human health (particulate matter, mercury, sulphur emissions, etc...).
Many countries (such as Germany and some Eastern European countries) use natural gas in electricity generation in some places. This has lower carbon emissions, yet is substantially more expensive. It would also be interesting to consider CO2 imports and exports (if you buy a product that was manufactured in another country, then you import CO2). As an example, power hungry aluminium smelters are located where electricity is the cheapest. Yet everybody uses aluminium.
I would also like a citation for the “example, US's GDP is slightly less than the EU's but our CO2 emissions are double the EU.” statement.
Iceland is a geologic freak which allows for geothermal energy generation. Even though it has this, the energy production isn't that great.
AFAIK, Iceland generates about 1336MW total capacity (calculated from CIA world factbook calculations). A modern nuclear power plant generates 1600MW.
A large aluminum smelter uses 1GW of power or even more (that is why they are often next to hydroelectric dams).
Also note that the EU emits about 70% of the Carbon dioxide that the US does.
Calculation:
Production per year kW hours 11710000000
Production per day (kWh) 32082191.78 Production per hour (kW) 1336757.991
MW: 1336.757991
They do use geothermal for home heating which has an above normal payout in large part due to the cold preventing normal heat pump's from working at reasonable efficiency and the long winders preventing solar home heating system from working when they are most needed them. Most of the continental US can use solar hot water heating systems with a fairly fast payback for lower cost than Iceland's geothermal systems.
I am just pointing out that "green" tech is already competing with fossil fuels and winning in many areas. It's not a question of turning off coal and other fossil fuels today, but rather limiting their use to the most useful systems such as cars and airplanes.
PS: Many homes in the US would reduce their CO2 emissions more by adding insulation than they would by doubling the fuel economy of their cars.
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_o...
Practically every country has gotten out of poverty at the cost of carbon emissions. The link isn't perfect but it is very strong. We need to get on a different curve. There doesn't seem to be any other way.
Finally I reject the notion that there doesn't seem to be any other way. I have much more faith in human innovation than that. I firmly believe that there is a market for green technologies, that, when fully developed, will create jobs, boost economies, and improve our global environment.
This is what I meant when I said "We need to get on a different curve."
Also, a 20-40% reduction in greenhouse gasses would (if done efficiently) cost less than 1 trillion over the next 20. years. (Multiply the cost Delta between electricity produced with coal to that produced non C02 producing options over their lifetime.)
PS: I often see people use the term "begging the question incorrectly" so I felt the need to point it out.
Edit: Wow, lots of hate. Do the math 1,000,000 * 1 million $ is a LOT of money, and coal plants have a finite lifetime.
EX: Coal fires in China burn 109 million tons of coal a year, emitting 360 million metric tons of CO2. This contradicts the ratio of 1:1.83 given earlier, but it amounts to 2-3% of the annual worldwide production of CO2 from fossil fuels, or as much as emitted from all of the cars and light trucks in the United States.[44] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal Stopping that would do more than requiring every American to drive a hybrid to work and yet it's ignored.