Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, who says that global warming "demands aggressive action," last week signed an agreement with the United Kingdom "to share experiences and strategies" in the fight against rising temperatures. Given the diffuse language of the agreement, it would be easy to dismiss Doyle's climate diplomacy as a stunt, but there is in fact a great deal that Wisconsin can learn from Britain.

For example, the British government has performed extensive economic analysis on a renewable energy policy that is remarkably similar to Doyle's plan to generate 25 percent of Wisconsin's electricity from clean energy sources, such as wind and solar, by 2025. In early May, the United Kingdom's Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform reported that Britain's renewable energy target - 15 percent by 2020 - will cost the average household about $400 a year in higher utility bills. To listen to politicians wax lyrical about "green jobs," one might think that reducing America's carbon footprint would be painless. The British study serves as an important reminder that there's no such thing as a free lunch.

If they value their jobs, politicians in Wisconsin would do well to analyze London's May 1 mayoral election. The incumbent, Ken Livingstone of the liberal Labour Party, tried to make the election a referendum on the need to "do something" about climate change. He put a $40 "green" congestion charge at the heart of his campaign, and he even told reporters that "the outcome of this election will determine whether ground-breaking policies to build on London's commitment to the Kyoto agreement on climate change will proceed or not." When it comes to political orientation, the capital of Great Britain is similar to the capital of Wisconsin, but on election day, London's 5.5 million voters rejected the progressive candidate and his climate agenda. The new, conservative mayor quickly announced that the congestion tax would be abandoned.

Wisconsin's sizable paper, machinery and transportation equipment industries can learn from their British counterparts how to avoid environmental regulations. Energy-intensive industries in Britain and across Europe have lobbied hard against the European Union's proposed "cap and trade" climate strategy, claiming that it would force them to move operations abroad by increasing energy costs. The advocacy appears to have paid off: In February, the European Commission announced it likely will exempt the metal and paper sectors from Europe's climate plan because "it is not in the interest of the European Union that in the future production moves to countries with less strict emissions limits."

The British experience with climate policy suggests that fighting climate change is popular but that paying for it isn't. American politicians have gotten around this contradiction by promising the moon. Doyle, for example, tells voters to join him "to fight climate change and secure a shared, prosperous future."

The sooner that politicians like Doyle start leveling with voters about the costs and benefits of fighting climate change, the better. Until then, the people of Wisconsin will have to make due with the British example.