They don't have to go to the South Pole to read the Barrett report.
I have never seen a bigger bunch of clods, morons and imbeciles in the senate than now.
When you want to correct a problem, go first where you can get the most bang for the buck. So, if you want to cut pollution, do so in the dirtiest industries. Pound for pound, relatively bigger gains will be had at lower cost/impact. Same principle applies to choosing which countries to focus on in trying to reduce emissions of "greenhouse gases".
So, even if you buy that global warming is real, that it's a threat, and that humans are a significant factor causing it, the cost/benefit ratio will be order of magnitude less productive by trying to apply the fix here in the US, where industrial production per pound of "greenhouse gas" is already very high due to other factors.
Even if you believe it's somehow uniquely the US's responsibility to fix this, in addition to swallowing all the questionable premises in the previous paragraph, it would cost less in money and jobs, in fact would create profit and jobs, to export modern manufacturing technology (the products, not the manufacturing) to places like China and Russia that have antiquated equipment built in an era where there was no incentive to build efficient machinery.
If you try to fix the problem where it substantively isn't; it reveals you don't actually care about the "problem" and it's all a political exercise.
ping
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")