The cost/benefit analysis should always be done prior to issuing far reaching environmental regulations.
If the regulations shut down most of a country's industry, then peple will starve to death from lack of money/food/jobs (but at least they will starve to death breathing clean air, thank goodness......I am being sarcastic).
There is no arguement about needing clean air, it is just a matter of how clean, and at what cost.
Do you bankrupt a country in order to achieve a slight amount of air quality?
The guy below did a good job of tracing the path of how all the environmental pimp stuff started.
There was a symposium I think in California, and I think Al Gore attended it, where they said there may be some global warming.
Al Gore created an industry around phony global warming data, and got supper rich in the process, while having one of the highest carbon footprints of any person in the world.
Even the guy who held the original global warming seminar eventually admitted that there may not be any global warming at all, or if there was, it may not have an effect on anything.
It was too late though, the global warming scam industry was unstopable, since it turned into a political thing.
So unfortunately the Al Gore's of the world just jet around the world in their luxury jets, living a life of luxury that few on this earth will ever seen, and they accomplish little or nothing from their chicken-little approach, other than getting filthy rich, and dumping massive amounts of pollution into the atmosphere.
So this is what chaps me about the global warming and other "environmental change" crusades; they become money generators for a few savy political types, and poor schmucks like you and I pay for it all.
Nothing practical ever gets done to solve any real problems; it just allows the rich to get richer.