We seem to have a classic impasse. There is the camp where cost is the issue and CO2 is ignored or argued away, and the camp where CO2 is the issue and cost is ignored or argued away. We need a camp where both cost and CO2 matter.
Say we had spent the $108B on building prototypes of new nuclear power plants, or infrastructure elements like CAES storage, CCS, thermal storage, high temperature solar receivers, high altitude wind, large scale electrolysis and fuel synthesis to name a few. Now we would be six years ahead in building and testing new things that would be adding to or subtracting from the deployable technology list as opposed to the speculative drawing board list. $18B a year could fund 36 $500M a year projects. To avoid factional fighting a rational plan would have CO2 reduction at affordable cost as the only determining factors.
Clearly StratoSolar should be on the list.