WASHINGTON — From higher electric bills to more expensive gasoline, the possible economic cost of tackling global warming is driving the debate as climate change takes center stage in Congress.

Legislation set for Senate debate today would require a reduction in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from power plants, refineries, factories, and transportation. The goal is to cut heat-trapping pollution by two-thirds by midcentury.

With gasoline at $4 per gallon and home heating and cooling costs soaring, it is getting harder to sell a bill that would transform the country’s energy industries and — as critics will argue — cause energy prices to rise even more.

Senator Lieberman, the Connecticut independent who is a leading sponsor of the bill, says computer studies suggest a modest impact on energy costs, with several projections for continued economic growth. Sponsors says the bill also offers billions of dollars in tax breaks to offset higher energy bills.

The debate on global warming is viewed as a watershed in climate change politics. Yet both sides acknowledge the prospects for passage are slim this election year.

Several Republican senators are promising a filibuster; the bill’s supporters are expressing doubt they can find the 60 votes to overcome the delaying tactic.

Only a few senators now dispute the reality of global warming. Still, there is a sharp divide over how to shift lessen the country’s heavy dependence on coal, oil, and natural gas without passing along substantially higher energy costs to people.

The petroleum industry, manufacturers, and business groups have presented study after study, based on computer modeling that they say bear out the massive cost and disruption from mandating lower carbon emissions.

Environmental groups counter with studies that show modest cost increases from the emission caps provide new incentives to develop alternative energy sources and promote energy efficiency and conservation.