Krugman and Moral High Ground

Let's get this out of the way right up front. I don't believe that human CO2 emissions are the primary driver of climate change. There are a lot of reasons I believe this but I am most skeptical of two things:

1. I don't trust the motives of those who advocate limiting CO2 emissions.
2. I don't trust the computer models that are being used to promote man made climate change.

Paul Krugman (and others who believe humans are the main problem with the planet) believes that if the US acts to reduce CO2 emissions, we will occupy the moral high ground:

As the United States and other advanced countries finally move to confront climate change, they will also be morally empowered to confront those nations that refuse to act. Sooner than most people think, countries that refuse to limit their greenhouse gas emissions will face sanctions, probably in the form of taxes on their exports. They will complain bitterly that this is protectionism, but so what? Globalization doesn’t do much good if the globe itself becomes unlivable.

It’s time to save the planet. And like it or not, China will have to do its part.

So, we should impose tariffs on Chinese goods to force them to reduce CO2 emissions and if we do this, Krugman assures us that it is a moral good. Reducing China's growth would mean that more of China's poor will stay poor, but we'll occupy the moral high ground? Ah, hell what do we care? We've got ours right? Fuck the Chinese. Let'em stay poor.