Ok can I hazard another angle on this to to see if both sides might find common ground in one area? Regardless climate change, is using oil and other fossils like we are now a good idea? I read that about 70% of oil is used a fuel, 30% for making most chemicals & paints, plastics, fertiliser (nudge nudge) and the list is very long. 10 to 15 calories of fossil fuel energy are used to create 1 calorie of food. As traders there must be some appreciation that oil/gas & coal are a VASTLY undervalued asset. The illusion that oil for example is cheap is a fantasy of epic proportions. As traders we might also consider say, how much of the US's defense budget is and has been spent on protecting oil supplies? How accurate is this statement from an article in 2010? I have not done the numbers but you get the gist: "According to estimates, we spend nearly half of our entire $685 billion defense budget protecting and ensuring the free flow of the approximately 730 million barrels of oil that we import annually from the Persian Gulf. And given the realities created by such terrifically large numbers, this means we spend an additional $469.00 on each of these units in order to bring them safely to market. So while we can all now happily fill up at a mere $2.70 per gallon, the actual price of that gas is much higher, once you figure in the cost of the defense dollars necessary to bring it all to market." We will be on the planet for a bit but we are using finite resources like there is no tomorrow, literally. Our population is growing exponentially and people keep looking at their shoes as if that is going to magically not screw us very soon. Technology might save our ass but.. A conservative in the true sense should do the math. Any conservative who does will realise that there are stupendously compelling reasons to put huge effort into going past burning fossils for heat. Even if there is no climate issue, it is an essential thing to do anyway.