"Reducing energy use is putting the whole country on a diet, and shrinking GDP would cause more pain and suffering than climate change in the short term." this

"Reducing energy use is putting the whole country on a diet, and shrinking GDP would cause more pain and suffering than climate change in the short term." this really seems to be the root of the matter. unfortunately the wording isn't completely clear. are you saying that we'd have to accept some economic discomfort in the short term to mitigate some serious long term issues? that seems like a tradeoff worth discussing. or are you saying that the consequences of economic contraction are so dire that we'd better just learn to deal with the environmental consequences. maybe we can find some market solutions (i.e. shifting to electricity) that reduce emissions somewhat without harming whats really important.