Obama's Budget Calls For Billions In "Climate Funding"

“Climate funding?” Really?  Yes, according to this article, Obama’s budget calls for expenditures of $10 billion or so (out of the $3.99 trillion total) for things like renewable energy incentives, cleantech R&D, etc.  But who’s calling this “climate funding?”  Its opponents?

My advice:  recognize that, to the degree that the U.S. government’s investment in fostering cleantech innovation is successful, it will have dozens of far-reaching effects, only one of which is mitigating climate change. 

In particular, we hope to head off a great many other environmental catastrophes before they take full and irreversible effect, e.g., loss of biodiversity and ocean acidification.  We will save the lives of countless millions of people who otherwise would have died of lung disease.  Reducing the value of oil means disempowering terrorism.  And we will position the U.S. for a rebound in global economic relevance to the degree we can catch up to what the rest of the world is doing in clean energy, an enterprise clearly destined to become the defining industry of the 21st Century.

Of course, this isn’t yet law.  In fact, it’s not really all that close; the Republicans and the oil companies that own them are going to go bananas about all this.  And calling it “climate funding” is, sorry to say, just stupid.  It’s like waving a red cape in front of a bull.

If we are successful in dealing with the many crises facing our civilization that are associated with fossil fuels, this moment in history will be remembered as a triumphant one in which human reason and decency won the day.  If we’re unsuccessful, it won’t be remembered at all, just as the patient on the operating table whose surgery is botched is silenced forever; he’s not around to rethink his treatment plan or scold his incompetent doctor.