While the United States struggles with the politics of passing an emissions-capping bill, passage of such legislation will likely not be the end of the debate on the topic. In the United Kingdom, which has approved its own long-term climate reduction bill, at least one member of Parliament is convinced the expense may not be worth the reward.

Citing figures that estimate the cost of the UKs current emissions capping plan at a high-end of 310 billion dollars, while estimating a similarly high-end figure of 166 billion dollars for the benefits, conservative MP Peter Lilley has questioned continuing with the program. "Would you insure your home with a company," asks Lilley, "if they charged premiums which could be double the value of your house?"

Ignoring the fact the figures he cites are a bit extreme, the fundamental problem with this argument is that the planet is not a house, and the impending disaster insurance protects is not hypothetical, but guaranteed. As one example of the impact of ignoring climate change, while crop damages can be roughly estimated, there's no way to properly analyze the human impact of resulting food shortages, or the political instability they may inspire.