Replies

imho the republican should compromise on this one.

First the republicans should strip out all the democrat mandates, regulations and carbon taxes.

---but leave in all the new R&D funding for renewable energies because the President wants the US to be energy dominant. that means being dominant in all energy sources including solar wind nuclear geothermal, compressed air. The way to be dominant is to be the lowest cost producer of every energy vertical. That requires R&D which is, after all, America’s bread and butter.

Then the republicans should start adding in provisions. From this they should take a cue from arguably our greatest ally and arguably our greatest enemy respectively Israel and China.

Both countries are investing a lot of money in desalination R&D, water infrastructure and reforestation.

Add in R&D for water desalination research. Its important here to understand that Israel has become water independent because of water desalination. They have collapsed the cost of desalinated water to the point where they can use it for agriculture. (the water is first sent to their cities and then is cleaned up to brown water standards and sent to their farms.) This feat is one of biblical proportions. Droughts were regular occurrences in bible. Israel no longer has to worry about drought or food security. The USA needs to do the research to bring down water desalination costs further to make desalination cheap enough for agriculture in the USA. That would make much of the southwest suitable for agriculture because brackish water underlies much of that area and the pacific ocean and gulf of mexico are nearby.

The second part is water infrastructure. Both Israel and China have built and are building pretty massive water infrastructure projects to move water around their countries. The US has not had any major water infrastructure projects for over half a century. One such project might bring east texas storm water to west texas. Another might move Mississippi spring flood water to the colorado basin. a third might move red river spring flood water to new mexico. a fourth might include a dam for california or a water catchment for one of southern california’s storm rivers.

The third part is trees. Both Israel and China are planting millions of trees to reclaim their deserts. As part of the program they both plant trees and shape the land to hold rainwater. The reason they do this is because trees rebuild the soil, hold the water and eventually make land suitable for living and agriculture. The Israelis have small projects going up all over Israel. The chinese are doing this at scale. They are reclaiming about 800 square miles a year from the deserts—which make up about half of china. The UN blesses the the Israeli and Chinese tree planting programs because trees reduce CO2. But never in a million years would China and Israel plant trees to curb CO2 alone. Rather, have their own reasons for planting trees.

Similarly the USA would have its own reason for planting trees. Planting trees for example throughout the southwest would go a long way toward reclaiming those areas from the desert, for habitation and agriculture Why do this?

Why do this?

Say you don’t think the feds should be spending money on alternative energy R&D and you don’t give a rats behind about the Israelis the Chinese or both. In fact, you don't give a rats behind about any other country but the USA.

Why do this?

The reason is because the president cannot win in 2020 on just his base. Nor can he count on a third party candidate to split the democrat vote. Texas went dangerously purple in the last election. One more election like that—and the republicans are done.

Something has to give.

Consider A Green Energy Bill that ostensibly promises to reduce CO2 by planting trees (because tree planting will get all the headlines since R&D & infrastructure are boring.)...but in reality promises to increase the habitable size of the USA by 1/3. This would appeal to all the suburban soccer moms —all over the country. Not because of the increased habitable size of the USA —but because of the reduction in CO2!

A recent study by yale showed that almost 70% of the country is at least somewhat concerned about climate change. big woof. knock off at least 15% because the pollsters were liberal. Ok we’re down to 55% of the populace. republicans need to take a slice out of this 55% part of the electorate to win in 2020. they are not democrats. (or about 40%)nothing trump does will win democrat votes. they are not republicans. Trump won’t gain or lose votes from republicans on this bill. the people trump want to sway are independents. the squishy middle. Those are 15/% of the voters.

Is it worth playing to the squish vote to get Trump re elected? You decide.

An interesting question is—why would the democrats go with a republican draft of the Green New Deal? (the republican draft would strip out all the democrat taxes, mandates and regulations.) Because CO2 is an existential threat according to radicals, centrists and leadership in the democrat party. The world only has 12 years before run away climate change is unstoppable.

Under those circumstances—half a loaf is better than none. they calculate that they can get the rest later—but they need to do something anything—right now.

We plant trees.

Govt money for r and d always comes with strings attached

Free armrest make innovation happen

You suggestions are not conservative

You are delusional. You way over think something when in fact Congress will do what Congress does best, nothing. At least until the Democrats take the trifecta and then Congress does what it does second best,choose the worst possible solution to a non-problem, thus causing another huge problem like a Great Depression.

In the final analysis, there is nothing any of us can do to solve the problem that IS Congress.