Yeah, I'll take a hard pass on this one. These two examples don't fit the climate change issue for two reasons. First, NASA and the Manhattan Project were both tasked with solving super-specific problems: putting a guy on the moon and building atomic weapons. There's no good analogy here with regard to climate change. We already know how to build nuclear plants, wind turbines, solar panels, and so on. What we need is more widespread adoption throughout the economy and broad-based technological improvements across the board. That's a totally different problem than the moon landing. Second, NASA and the Manhattan Project both addressed issues that would never be addressed by the free market. The market never cared about putting people on the moon, and national defense is a textbook "public goods" problem that requires government to produce. Climate change requires innovation throughout the economy, and private firms are really good at responding to signals that crop up through the price mechanism.
Edit: I would have been against this sort of thing anyway, but I also think this is a lesson that should have been reinforced during the pandemic. Private firms created covid vaccines literally over a weekend before any cases had arrived in the US. The relevant NASA-like arms of government -- the CDC and FDA -- screwed up testing, lied about masks, blocked the importation of masks, and slow-walked vaccine approval. I truly expect that nationalizing our response to climate change will make the problem worse, not better.
