NWA Letters to the Editor

Some energy costs need to rise to affect climate

Don Bogard ("Carbon tax won't solve U.S. energy challenges, Letters, Nov. 6) opposes putting a tax on carbon dioxide emissions and rebating the tax directly to consumers because "it will raise energy prices." That's the idea! But it will only raise some energy prices. Solar, wind, geothermal, hydro and nuclear energy would not be taxed. Such a tax would completely phase out coal with great attendant health benefits by reduction of pollution.

Mr. Bogard accurately points out that expanded use of nuclear energy is necessary in any plan to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but doesn't really advocate for it, just mentions it. Current reactors are stone age technology. Much better types of reactors have been designed, for example reactors that use thorium instead of uranium. The US had a working thorium reactor but abandoned it because the navy didn't find it suitable for their nuclear submarines. This country needed an infrastructure program, not a tax cut for Republican campaign donors, with an emphasis on nuclear power, which is much more reliable than wind or solar.

Doing nothing will result in tremendous losses. PBS has a series on "Sinking Cities" that examines the situations of New York and Tokyo. A combination of sea-level rise and more intense and abundant rainfall threaten to destroy enormous amounts of infrastructure, but Mr. Bogard apparently thinks that won't cost anything. A recent paper examined heat stress lethal to humans and concluded that large portions of the tropics might become uninhabitable if we do not drastically cut greenhouse emissions. For more than 40 years scientists have tried to warn us that a day of reckoning was coming, but the fossil fuel industries (lead by the Koch Brothers) drowned out the message with a disinformation campaign copied from the tobacco industry.

Among the industrialized nations, the United States leads in per capita greenhouse emissions. This is the reason we ought to lead in this area, but the leadership of the current administration believes human-caused climate change is a "Chinese hoax." Stupid!

Malcolm K. Cleaveland, Ph.D.

Fayetteville

Stop advertising drugs, and cover those breasts

I wholeheartedly agree with the point made by Chuck Haun of Garfield [Letters, Nov. 9] that drug companies should not spend millions advertising direct to consumers. It was a letter that has been in my head for a while. (Amazing that anyone would ask his doctor for any of these drugs given the horrible list of possible side effects attached to each.)

Another letter swimming around in my head which may get me yelled at: I wholeheartedly support the "me too" movement. I saw a lot of bad stuff in my working days. But would the women publicly supporting it on the media please do so in clothes that cover up their breasts?

Beverly Cannady

Bella Vista