Another point is the savings that investing in clean energy offers. In other words some of the spending is an investment leveraging past R and D that will save $Trillions per decade going forward. Examples:

1. Wind solar and batteries are now cheaper then coal and gas for electric production. This is especially true near the equator, but applies world wide. The US utilities are closing down coal electric plants now because building wind and solar offers lower cost per KWh.
2. We have hit a tipping point in transportation cost for commercial applications. It is now cheaper in terms of capital fuel maintenance to buy EV.
3 . R and D investments by the US government are not new spending. It is a shift in the current budget to clean energy that will accelerate the future saving in electric production and transportation costs. Investments in technology R and D for CO2 capture, agriculture and manufacturing are also leveraged spending for the future but I am not sure if these funds are incremental or if consumer costs will go up or down (I don’t study those areas.
4. Wars cost money. We are reducing the potential of yet another war over oil, these recently cost the US 3 trillion dollars over about 2 decades. Also not that less oil consumption means less funding of Russian and Middle East Terrorists.
5. We do need consumers to sacrifice and invest if the pace of CO2 reduction is to be faster. Buying an EV and spending the same as you would for a gas car means adjusting to a different type of car. Buying a heat pump will pay for itself but only over several years. On the other hand if the increase in summer temperatures has you thinking about air conditioning the heat pump is a cheaper way to go.

Bottom line spending on CO2 reduction is not taking more money in terms of tax and consumer cost for all CO2 reduction. Some of the additional spending is incremental but I suspect much of the spending is different use of funds not all incremental .