Overall, the economic effects of global warming cannot be definitively placed because there is a long time horizon to be considered and the effects even in the short run are not known to any degree of precision because of the lack of consensus on the scientific effects of global warming. The Republicans usually argue against imposing limits on carbon dioxide emissions because it would hurt the economy without any discernible benefits. However, this argument is only correct when looking at a short time horizon. In the short term, the costs to reducing carbon dioxide emissions are likely to be nontrivial while the benefits will be very small. However, the short-term is not the proper sphere in which to analyze the economic effects of global warming.

In the long term, global warming will impose significant costs on the economy. First, if global temperatures rise, then there will be higher demand for heating and cooling houses throughout the year. This would (currently) cause a rise in the price of oil (used for heating oil and to generate electricity). In the post-WWII era, every economic recession has occurred at a time of rising oil prices. It is not much of a stretch to see this continue for the foreseeable future. Thus, an increase in oil demand year-round would slow economic growth. Seen in this light, efforts to control the emission of carbon dioxide, however costly it may seem in the short run, would be significantly less than the long run economic costs of global warming.