Consensus is not science, but I think that you will have to admit that most economists state that given the unsettled science of global warming, the economic trade off that would be required to prevent it, are not worth it. Even the UN report stated that the steps that the radical environmentalists are advocating would leave the average person around the world 30% poorer and much less able to cope with any effects of global warming that might occur.
If the left were really serious about green house gases, they would be advocating nuclear power plants and windmills. But the fact remains that as long as China and India are not subjected to the same controls that the socialists want to put on the US, any steps that we would take would be meaningless.
I see that you are from the University of WA, I assume that you have read Gregoire's executive order on climate change. She states that she based it on the same U.W. climatologists who made a fool of her two years ago, by getting her to declare a drought in Feb.
One of her requirements concerns biodiesel for school buses, but school districts which have already switched to the clean diesel experienced a lot of trouble in the cold weather. The buses started up just fine, but then the fuel thickened and the engines died, leaving kids stranded at school bus stops in freezing weather. Just what we need.