The U.S. Supreme Court Considers Entergy Corporation v. Riverkeeper - WSJ.com

Green groups have a history of rejecting cost-benefit analysis as a matter of ideology more than utility. They don't trust business, and they believe that their own specific environmental goals are a higher public good than whatever is lost to society from exorbitant costs. But there is a price for everything in life, and reasonable regulation ought to include a judgment about relative costs and benefits.

Oregon: Another alarmist tries to defeat climate realists by using the "you've already lost" argument

Even if I were inclined to agree with the global warming deniers, they've lost this battle in the court of public opinion. We will be adopting policies designed to deal with CO2 emissions and global warming. Those who deny the very premise of these policies will have no influence on how they are shaped. Those who accept the need to regulate CO2 emissions will have the chance to affect these policies in a way that won't wreck our economy or create needless hardship and suffering here and around the world.

This guy needs to take a serious look at some recent polling results.