Should The EPA Be The Most Powerful Federal Agency In Science?

As predicted, both sides claimed to care about science first. The Democrats produced experts who showed evidence [what evidence, specifically?] that CO2 was the primary culprit in climate change, though thankfully for science overall they did not try and endorse any particular public policy. The Republicans produced experts who noted that the planet is warming but...the reasons are unclear, which is obviously less convincing. Still, both sides agree on climate change these days, so we are making progress.

Can Clean Energy Drive America's Future? | Climate | Warmist Marc Gunther

They've both overstating their case. Most economists agree that the decarbonizatoon of the U.S. economy will cost money -- just not a whole lot, and certainly much less than the damage that will eventually be caused by global warming.
...
Ritter had mostly anecdotes to offer in response. In Colorado, he said, renewable energy mandates had attracted jobs to the state from manufacturers like Vestas. "When we're talking about wind manufacturing, you can't do those jobs in China," he said.

He made the point, too, that the costs of wind and solar power are coming down. A flat screen TV "cost $1,500 four years ago," he said. "Now it's $350. Should we have given up on flat screen TVs?"