Huh. A good hard look at "social costs".

A long but interesting and very informative read, right here.

And this brings me back to the question of cost/benefit analyses and the idea of the “social benefit of carbon”. As noted above, people put the “social cost of carbon” (actually carbon dioxide) at “roughly $40 per ton”. 

Now, remember that corresponding to the “social cost of carbon”, the “social benefit of carbon” is: 

… the dollar value of the total benefits from emitting one ton of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. 

As Figure 6 shows, the benefit that we get from emitting that additional tonne of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is an increase in goods and services of $4,380 … which dwarfs the assumed social cost of carbon of $40. When we do an actual cost/benefit analysis, the result is almost all benefit.

I'm a big fan of CO2.  Plants can't exist without it.  If you freeze it and drop it into root beer, you have an awesome holiday drink for kids that makes them all think you're a genius.  But mostly the plant food thing, because my food eats plants, and without plants, my food couldn't be turned into, well, MY FOOD.

Also, asparagus.  I do eat asparagus.  Which also cannot grow without CO2.

And I still want to kick every eco-freak I meet straight in the twig and berries, in the hope that they won't reproduce and spread their stupidity genes.