> Blah blah blah, announcements of a plan to create a committee to create a committee.
You're willfully ignoring things I wrote up there to paint a very dishonest narrative.
> Every year, the President’s budget continues to invest in the crucial programs that will keep the United States at the forefront of clean energy research, development, and deployment.
Read this -- research into clean energy requires funding from the federal government. Much like the moonshots projects in the 60s in space and defense, we need something similar in a way that's not entirely dependent on the Wall Street markets (who are focused on short term gains).
Don't you think this is much better and actionable than a committee?
> And solar grew because it got massively cheaper. Guess what, it'll continue to grow under Trump.
Why can't Obama claim credit for that? Do you think it would have happened independently of his administration's viewpoints on solar?
No doubt, if he holds status quo, solar will continue to grow at the same or higher pace. But if he subsidizes coal further, I would be skeptical. But we will know whether your prediction was true or not in a few years time.
> Don't get me wrong, I did vote for Obama
I'm not getting you wrong, you're getting me wrong. You're just dismissing reasonable conversation. And you voting for Obama doesn't give you a blank cheque to parade inarticulate arguments nor does it give you the freedom to cherrypick what you liked and disliked about his election.
> In September 2013, EPA announced proposed standards for new power plants and initiated outreach to a wide variety of stakeholders to help inform the development of emission guidelines for existing plants. In June 2014, EPA released the Clean Power Plan — the first-ever carbon pollution standards for existing power plants that will protect the health of our children and put our nation on the path toward a 30 percent reduction in carbon pollution from the power sector by 2030.
> Since President Obama took office, the U.S. has increased solar electricity generation by more than ten-fold, and tripled electricity production from wind power. Building on the advancements of the first term, we continue to take new and comprehensive action to encourage cleaner forms of American-made energy. Through public-private partnerships, streamlining the federal permitting process, and furthering American leadership in clean energy, we are on track to meet our clean-energy goals: to install 100 megawatts of renewable capacity across federally subsidized housing by 2020, permit 10 gigawatts of renewable projects on public lands by 2020, deploy 3 gigawatts of renewable energy on military installations by 2025, and double wind and solar electricity generation in the United States — once again — by 2025.
> That is why President Obama created the Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) in 2009. This Agency helps to advance high-impact energy projects that have the potential to transform the way we generate, store, and use energy. Every year, the President’s budget continues to invest in the crucial programs that will keep the United States at the forefront of clean energy research, development, and deployment.
> The Obama administration has proposed the toughest fuel economy standards for passenger vehicles in U.S. history, requiring an average performance equivalent of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. The Administration has also finalized the first-ever fuel economy standards for commercial trucks, vans, and buses for model years 2014-2018. These standards are projected to save over 500 million barrels of oil and save vehicle owners and operators an estimated $50 billion in fuel costs.
And I'm quoting about a fifth of what's written there. I am honestly surprised that you can dismiss everything here. Even more so in comparison to the person who tweeted like this.
You're willfully ignoring things I wrote up there to paint a very dishonest narrative.
> Every year, the President’s budget continues to invest in the crucial programs that will keep the United States at the forefront of clean energy research, development, and deployment.
Read this -- research into clean energy requires funding from the federal government. Much like the moonshots projects in the 60s in space and defense, we need something similar in a way that's not entirely dependent on the Wall Street markets (who are focused on short term gains).
Don't you think this is much better and actionable than a committee?
> And solar grew because it got massively cheaper. Guess what, it'll continue to grow under Trump.
Why can't Obama claim credit for that? Do you think it would have happened independently of his administration's viewpoints on solar?
No doubt, if he holds status quo, solar will continue to grow at the same or higher pace. But if he subsidizes coal further, I would be skeptical. But we will know whether your prediction was true or not in a few years time.
> Don't get me wrong, I did vote for Obama
I'm not getting you wrong, you're getting me wrong. You're just dismissing reasonable conversation. And you voting for Obama doesn't give you a blank cheque to parade inarticulate arguments nor does it give you the freedom to cherrypick what you liked and disliked about his election.
> http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/09/politics/supreme-court-obama-e...
Read that. His administration has been hampered by Republicans on partisan lines from 2010, and maybe even day 1 depending on whom you ask.
Don't get me wrong, I welcome criticism about his transparency, whistleblower treatment, and spying.