Tribune: Renewable energy might be cheaper than war

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the cumulative cost of the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will be between $1.2 trillion and $1.7 trillion by 2017. The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board responds:

From these numbers, we draw the conclusion that U.S. national security would be better served by winding down the Asian wars as quickly as possible and concentrating the
money now being spent there on developing renewable energy sources that will reduce U.S. dependency on foreign oil. It may be cheaper to develop alternatives to oil than to fight for it in Asia. [...]

[G]iven the costs of the war in Iraq and the price of oil, the huge numbers that are often quoted for developing renewable energy in the United States do not look so daunting. For example, the editors of Scientific American magazine estimate that the U.S. government would have to invest about $450 billion to help build solar arrays in the Southwest that could produce 69 percent of the nation's electric power and 35 percent of its total energy needs by 2050. That would cut both oil consumption and carbon emissions that contribute to global warming by roughly one-third.

In the context of the Asian wars, that looks like a bargain.