According to a new study, the price tag for progressives' controversial Green New Deal proposal could have a price tag of more than $94 trillion.

What are the details?

Analysts at American Action Forum, a right-leaning think tank, "distilled" the 10-year plan down to its policy basics, in order to figure the costs of its ambitions plans for:

1. A 10-year transition to an exclusively low-carbon energy electricity grid;

2. Enough high-speed rail transit available that air travel becomes unnecessary;

3. Guaranteeing union jobs with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States;

4. Universal health care;

5. Guaranteed housing for every American; and

6. Food security for every person in the United States.

All told, researchers found the 10-year price tag could be as high as $94.4 trillion, which breaks down to $653,010 per household over the decade — meaning the annual cost per household would be $65,300.

According to the Washington Free Beacon, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) — who chairs the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works — responded to the report by saying, "The American Action Forum's analysis shows that the Green New Deal would bankrupt the nation."

Noting the price tag, he added, "That is roughly four times the value of all Fortune 500 companies combined. That's no deal."

"Instead, we should promote innovation to reduce carbon dioxide emissions," Barrasso continued. "Promising new technologies like advanced nuclear power, carbon capture and carbon utilization hold the key to significant emissions reductions. We can lower our emissions without crashing our economy."

Anything else?

Republicans haven't been the only critics of the plan.

On Sunday, the Washington Post's editorial board launched the first in a series of articles aimed at proposing its "own Green New Deal." The board slammed the current plan proposed by Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), saying, "they should not muddle this aspiration with other social policy, such as creating a federal jobs guarantee."

The Post went on to say the current plan floated by lawmakers "is so monumental that the country cannot afford to waste dollars in its pursuit."