If you put it all together, each house would have $400 to spend (a year) on things other than energy.

In developing countries the situation could be even worse because developing countries do not have to count their emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Private companies from industrialized nations will seek cheap carbon credits for their country in the developing world.

In some of the more energy intensive industries, there would be negative change in jobs. But when you look at state levels, even states that had large sectors of the energy industries in them, they had overall positive change in jobs.

The credibility of Japan as a responsible global actor is at stake. It would be tragic if Japan's vacillation killed a vital U.N. agreement.

Places that Americans love like Florida's coral reefs and the alpine meadows of the Rocky Mountains could suffer greatly from global warming, according to the report.

Trees only absorb carbon to a certain point in their lifetime.

This project in Australia is just one example of what could go terribly wrong for the world's forests if the governments of Japan, Australia and the United States get their way next week at the climate summit in the Hague. Instead of reducing the pollution that causes global warming, these countries are looking for quick fixes that have high risks for forests.

With smart policies, climate protection could become an economic engine, unleashing entrepreneurial creativity on a problem that otherwise threatens huge economic and environmental costs.

(As currently drafted) the Kyoto Protocol could actually accelerate forest destruction by giving incentives to plant large-scale plantations on formerly native forest land.