Can you elaborate on the last point? Your claim that "[t]he green decarbonization policy push has raised the price of adapting to summer heat" seems reasonable for regulations/taxes that raise energy prices. But the next part, that "more $ should be spent on resilience in the face of flooding and summer heat than on subsidizing solar panels for all" doesn't logically follow to me--don't the solar subsidies reduce energy prices ceteris paribus, and thus have the additional benefit of easing adaptation for exactly the reasons you describe?
Can you elaborate on the last point? Your claim that "[t]he green decarbonization policy push has raised the price of adapting to summer heat" seems reasonable for regulations/taxes that raise energy prices. But the next part, that "more $ should be spent on resilience in the face of flooding and summer heat than on subsidizing solar panels for all" doesn't logically follow to me--don't the solar subsidies reduce energy prices ceteris paribus, and thus have the additional benefit of easing adaptation for exactly the reasons you describe?