Also it is quite certain that the problem is not small, if we do not address it in time. Do not forget that Argentina was one of the wealthiest countries in the world a hundred years ago and lost that predominantly, because the politicians overspent. Something similar happened to the British after WW2 and they lived poorly for decades. The other countries will not continue to finance our lifestyle much longer. If we do not correct our ways, they will. That would be really unpleasant for most Americans.
Without growth reducing CO2 will be a killer. There was a large study out of England that estimated the ruduction in growth to be 1-2% BIP. I looked at the Research pretty closly and think it is somewhat optimistic given today's technology. Think more "LifeChangiung". Alone the flight Frankfurt, Germany to San Francisco, California is about, what an inhabitant of the world is allowed in emissions for a year. No more meat. No more heating nor internet.
Now that is something we can live with, I am sure. But it would possibly not be necessary, if we develop more efficient technology first. This was Bush's approach and it has panned out. Should the US increase alternative energy use now, it will have a much cheaper stock of production facilities, than it would have, had it started, when Clinton initialed the Kyoto Protocol. This does not mean we would not have to start sometime. But it also does not look as if the issue is as pressing as we were lead to believe. Newer research points out that we probably have more time. This will not