Broad efforts are needed. Better energy efficiency in buildings would be a huge step in the right direction.

I think there are two things you de-emphasize even as you emphasize the difficulties in change. One is the actual damage we probably are already experiencing. This is very hard to calculate, but is a very real thing. It was predicted that tropical diseases would move into temperate zones, and we are seeing that with associated health care costs. The ski industry is losing snow days (and has hence has been pushing green policies). The insurance industry HAS been making calculations about what they may be losing due to climate shifts and have been concerned for about a decade now. I don't know how acurate these calculations could possibly be, but I do know that insurance companies do their damnedest to get these kinds of calculations as detailed as possible because their profits depend on it, so their concerns are of note. You know the litany. The industry that is most likely to go extinct because of climate shifts is the US maple syrup industry. I guess most people don't care about that but I bet a lot of people in Vermont are worried about it.

It is easy to ignore these costs because they are scattered across many industries and are very hard to calculate and to directly ascribe to climate shifts. I do believe that we are already experiencing considerable costs, but that is more a guesstimate than a scientific observation on my part. But I have been paying attention to what some industries are saying about it.

The second thing that I think should get more emphasis is that many of the most important actions we need to take would have side benefits. The ones I emphasize the most is the shift of energy dependence to more local/regional resources rather than national/international resources. This reduces transportation costs and creates local jobs. Another benefit I see of a concerted energy policy shift is a possible revival of manufacturing. Right now we import a lot of our clean energy technology. Denmark is, if I remember correctly, the world's prime supplier of wind turbines. Why not manufacture them in Detroit, Flint and elsewhere in the rust belt and WE can become the world's prime supplier. That means jobs. We need jobs. I say put two and two together.

Government can't mandate much of what is needed, but can sure spend some money on it and provide incentives as well as a large market for some products. Retooling does indeed take time. But America has been able to do so quite rapidly when the will has been there. Sometimes with considerably more ease than one would expect. The rapidity by which we went from no railroads to being a railroad nation is one example off the top of my head. The NYC subway system was a huge effort. Etc. It can be done. I like focusing on how to do it in a way that best beneifts us now as well as benefits our children.