in all fairness Robdar that is a great question, but - without accepting the initial premise of the OP then it seems off topic and premature to launch into a discussion of possible solutions
however lets assume that the 97.5% of climate scientists that agree that humans are contributing to the observed rise in global temperatures, and that the massive body of other empirical evidence supporting that conclusion are correct and are not part of a massive global scam perpetrated by an entire field of science...what to do about it.....
Energy efficiency is clearly the most cost effective and achievable source of CO2 reductions - its also the biggest target to aim at. And nobody can credibly argue that using less energy to achieve more is a bad thing, climate change, AGW or otherwise.
Comparing various country's energy intensity - the amount of energy consumed to produce a unit of GDP - is a good place to start thinking about legislative solutions that will enhance competitiveness.
At the state level in the US this can be demonstrated to be true - California is the benchmark of what can be achieved with decades of integrated legislation and bi-partisan support. Examples include legislation to limit the percentage of public lighting on streets and in parks that was pointed at the sky, heating and ventilation duct leakage and painting flat roofs white.
On a personal level I have dedicated the last 3 years of my career to working on the electrical efficiency of datacenters. Most recently I have been working on a technology that promises to reduce electricity consumption of data storage devices by 90%. As a family we live in a house (built to Californian building codes) that is size appropriate for our family. We use our bicycles and walk where possible. I work from home. We recycle our trash. We try not to eat too much red meat, and fail on that one at least twice a month :-)
Hope that helps....maybe a new thread is in order to discuss solutions in more detail....
