Is there a target audience or tone? Academic or popular?

Sort of in between. Library and institutional sales. Big publisher, but inprint targets libraries and institutions and specifically not bookstores because this type of title does not reach a big enough audience to make a profit with the deep discount, high return rate and slow pay. Yeah, libraries are really a growing market with all the budget cuts.

My thoughts so far:

Windmills, not weapons. Why spending money on clean American energy will buy more national security than money wasted on stupid wars.

Clean Energy, not Stupid Wars. Why diverting most of the military budget into clean energy will keep us safer and make us richer and protect the environment besides.

Probably using the word "stupid" in the title is a bad idea. But I realized that diverting military spending to clean energy is really kind of core. Only place to get the level of public spending needed.

What about some take on "They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore."?

Swords into Windmills: How Waging War on Climate Change Will Make Us Safer and Richer

Yes. that is a good suggestion. Can people keep ideas coming? I don't know what my editor really wants so I'm planning to throw a lot of titles at her and see if one of them sticks.

My slight modification

Swords into Windmills: How Clean Energy Will Make Us Safer, Richer and Healthier than Dirty Wars

I like Fevered Planet.

So do I but the Editor doesn't. Once I've sold them on buying the book I can try to talk them into a better title. My current thought.

Clean energy, not dirty wars: How diverting military spending into clean energy can make America Safer, richer and healthier.

Do you need to get the war thing into the title? Is that more important to you than the issue of market-driven reforms? I ask because your argument sounds like the reforms issue was more central, but you seem to be dropping that from your title now.

Not sure. I mean both important. Market tinkering won't solve the problem. Large scale public investment will, really large scale. IN theory we could get the money other places than cutting military spending - taxes on the rich and so on. But in practice I think a lot of has to come from cutting the military for various reasons. So: don't know. The thing is too much to really fit in a title. So don't know what shouuld be in the title.