OPINION:
Are we hopping from the fossil-fuel frying pan into the “fracking” fire (“Carbon dioxide emissions stayed flat in 2016, global economy expanded,” Web, March 21)? And are we being a little myopic while doing it? First, the reduction of carbon-dioxide emissions could be attributable to the rise of alternative energy sources. The International Energy Agency website displays an informative graph illustrating the growing utilization of solar- and wind-energy sources. Alternative sources don’t emit carbon dioxide. (Nor do they emit methane or cause earthquakes in Oklahoma.)
It’s a given. Natural gas emits less carbon dioxide, but just as arsenic takes longer than a machine gun to kill its victims, no amount of carbon dioxide is good for us. Doesn’t it then make sense to utilize natural power sources that do none of the above?
Or taking another view, the fossil fuel industry is not going away anytime soon. Maybe, then, it should pay for the privilege of gifting us with carbon dioxide and help defray the cost of the respiratory problems that the byproduct imposes on the public. Some eminent Republicans, including former secretaries of state in the Reagan administration, James A. Baker and George P. Shultz, have formed the Climate Leadership Council, advocating for carbon dividends at the largest greenhouse-gas-emitting regions.
When the bottom line is affected, carbon-dioxide emissions will fall and the world will breathe a clean sigh of relief.
PATRICIA M. CUFF
Montgomery Village, Md.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.