White House Seeks 72 Percent Cut To Clean Energy Research (engadget.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Engadget: The Trump administration has made it very clear that it is pro fossil fuels and has little interest in pushing programs the promote renewable energy. Now, the Washington Post reports that the president's proposed 2019 budget slashes funds for Energy Department programs focused on energy efficiency. While the proposal is just a jumping off point, the fact that it seeks to cut such funding by 72 percent underscores where the administration's interests lie and in which direction its policies will continue to go. The draft budget documents viewed by Washington Post staff showed that the president is looking to cut the Energy Department's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) budget to $575.5 million, down from the current $2.04 billion level. Included in the budget cuts are funds for programs researching fuel efficient vehicles, bioenergy technologies, solar energy technology and electric car technologies. Additionally, the draft budget proposal seeks to cut jobs, dropping staff levels from 680 down to 450. One EERE employee told the Washington Post, "It shows that we've made no inroads in terms of convincing the administration of our value, and if anything, our value based on these numbers has dropped." The report notes that the Energy Department had requested less extreme spending cuts, but the Office of Management and Budget pushed for the more substantial ones found in the draft proposal. It's also worth noting that the proposal could still be changed before being released in February.

Comments

Re:Good

[WindBourne]

Sigh. Another GOP who has never served in the military.
Look, the military is about PROTECTION of America, and improving our defense. The highway system was built up to serve the military in times of war, while also helping our nation in a civilian fashion.
Energy is a SERIOUS issue for the military and our nation. As such, this R&D and even the subsidies to get this stuff going, IS about defense.
And as has been pointed out by the DOD, climate change, if it goes too far, will lead to massive numbers of wars and refugee issues.

Sadly, ppl like you are NOT listening to them because you AND YOUR FAMILY NEVER FUCKING SERVED.
You have NO idea of what it means to put it on the line. Nor do you have any idea of what it means to AVOID a war.
Far too many of you on the right, are like trump, cowards.

Re:corporate welfare

[ShanghaiBill]

Right, let's socialize the cost and privatize the profits.

That is not inherently bad. We subsidize the research, the company makes profits, and the public benefits from less CO2 emissions and a stronger dollar from fewer fossil fuel imports (or more FF exports). Win-win.

We can also take it further, and set up a patent-pool for all companies that accept research subsidies. This keeps the IP out of the hands of NPEs (who will just sit on them), while simultaneously encouraging companies to participate in creating shared IP. So we are encouraging both the creation and the sharing of innovation. Again: win-win.

Re:What planet are you on?

[WindBourne]

First, I used to be Libertarian, but am now GDI. IOW, I have less to do with dems than I do with GOP, which is very little.
Secondly, it is the GOP that continues to gut the fundings for education. For states that have given decent funding, like we used to do back in the 40-60s, they are tops in our nation. Who are the worst? Those with little funding.

BTW, my sons go to a charter school . Next year, they are switching to a stem charter school. Why? Because Koch bros funded a bunch of fucking GOPers who took over Douglas County school district in Colorado about 7 years ago, and drove what was considered a top 50 district in the nation, and top 5 in the state into mid-20 in the state and not even ranked in the nation. While my house's value HAS gown up in that time, it used to be at the top for growth. Now, we are middle of the road for value in a state that is booming.