A frequently overlooked element of the energy/climate debate — most debates about big issues, really — is opportunity cost. That is to say, there’s a limited stock of national attention and money, and if you argue that a large portion should to go one set of issues, you are implicitly arguing that proportionately less should go to other issues.
That, at least, is my tenuous hook for pointing out that Rudy Giuliani’s recent foreign policy manifesto — which argues for an enormous increase in "defense" spending, a principled rejection of diplomacy and international agreements, and a reorientation of the entirety of American government and society around fighting (and, I’m not kidding, the caps here are Giuliani’s, not mine) the Terrorists’ War on Us — would, if implemented, leave us in an extremely poor position to address our pressing energy and climate problems.
It’s also insane. Jim Henley has more on that aspect.
