{{featured_button_text}}

Ironically, Mary Geddry’s recent letter allows readers to witness her own vaporous adherence to a green ideological viewpoint absent fact or substance. Mary’s inability to provide factual information based upon science and economics was, in large part, what caused the overwhelming defeat of her beloved anti-fossil fuel effort (Measure 6-162) last year. Mary’s assertion that all fossil fuels are essentially equal is intellectually lazy. Make no mistake, nature gas is the bridge fuel needed to ween Asia off of dirty coal and still keep the lights on.

Apparently, Mary didn’t read my April 22 LTE which cited a prominent peer reviewed study led by a team of Princeton University researchers. Their findings were published in the Nature Sustainability Journal last September. Overall, these researchers find that a switch from coal to natural gas, excluding synthetic gas derived from coal, produces air, carbon and water co-benefits when methane leakage is controlled. Denise Mauzerall, professor of civil and environmental engineering and public and international affairs at Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School of Engineering and Applied Science stated: “While the paper focuses on China, its general conclusions are widely applicable”.

Mary makes a baseless assumption that we can easily convert to full reliance upon green energy sources in a short period of time. Unfortunately, Mary doesn’t appreciate or understand the economic implications and required math necessary in calculating the impacts upon world consumers. We will all suffer severe economic impacts in exchange for a negligible drop in global temperatures.

For instance, The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change states we must limit global temperatures to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above preindustrial levels. Nobel Laureate, William Nordhaus recently provided modeling which demonstrates the IPCC report significantly underestimates economic costs and is practically impossible to achieve.

Specifically, the EU promises to cut emissions 80% by 2050. Even with reasonable assumptions about technological advancements and the efficient implementation of EU climate policy, the average of seven peer-reviewed models finds EU annual costs will reach $3.3 trillion. That is twice what EU governments spend today on health, education, recreation, housing, environment, police and defense combined!

Finally, Mary should contact the Coos Forest Protective Association to learn how fire danger is lessened thru common sense policies which govern the clearing, maintenance and access to utility right-of-ways. The Pacific Connector Pipeline will create, maintain, monitor and provide firefighters easy access to fight a conflagration like the one caused by Rogue Climate.

Todd Goergen

Coos Bay

Be the first to know - Sign up for Breaking News

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.
11
1
0
0
4

Tags