Feels like a category error to say that Trump is necessarily against renewable energy rather than just against specific types of renewable energy.

A lot of greenies are against hydroelectric because even though it provides base load power for decades or even centuries, the building of reservoir and the damning of a river typically has major environmental impacts that they feel override the benefits.

If there's concern about offshore wind because of the potential -- the actualized potential by the way in a limited number of cases -- then that would explain why there would be the pushback against offshore wind.

The problem with water is that unlike land which tends to be fairly localized, just a little bit of pollution can affect an absurd amount of water. That's why they tell people not to dump their motor oil in the ground, because one drop of motor oil can pollute thousands of gallons of water.

I tend to be less interested in solar because empirically speaking it seems to drive up electricity costs for actual consumers regardless of the cost of a specific kilowatt hour of electricity at peak production, and less interested in wind because sometimes it is bright or cold and the wind doesn't blow, the Germans already have a word for this because it is relatively common.

That being said, there's no reason to be against good technology that actually does what it's supposed to do, and that can mean hydroelectric, it can mean well regulated nuclear, it can mean geothermal, but just because something is marketed as green doesn't mean that it is actually good for the environment. Everything at an industrial scale is a out trade-offs. Different people will look at things through different lenses and find different trade-offs more example and other trade-offs less acceptable.