Climate debate shifts to how to cut carbon emissions: #tellusatoday
Letters to the editor:
Thank you for supporting increased action to address the dangers of climate change. Sen. Jeff Sessions’ response underscored why the United States continues to be a barrier to effective action (“Excuses for climate inaction melt away: Our view,” “Sen. Sessions: Energy restrictions all pain, no gain”).
POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media
By claiming that reducing fossil fuel emissions will hurt the economy, Sessions — and his fellow climate change doubters, who are overwhelmingly Republican — perpetuate the stalling that ensures climate change consequences worsen and makes the unavoidable structural and economic changes more painful to achieve. A rational solution of implementing a national carbon tax would stimulate the economy through efficiency of demand and alternative energy innovation. A carbon tax provides common ground for Republicans and Democrats to address climate change and strengthen our economy.
Alan Wright; Roslindale, Mass.
Carbon emissions from U.S. power plants reached a 27-year low in April, driven largely by the switch to cleaner-burning natural gas. It wasn’t government mandates that inspired the change but the abundance of affordable natural gas made possible by the U.S. energy resurgence.
Your editorial laments that America’s alleged lack of market-based action forces the Obama administration “to pursue top-down strategies that rely on government mandates.” This is exactly backward. Market-driven progress in reducing carbon emissions was well underway by the time the Obama administration chimed in with its costly Clean Power Plan.
Perhaps the Obama administration believes it won’t get credit for emissions reductions unless it imposes regulations after the fact. The problem is, the recent regulatory onslaught threatens major harm to the economy.
The USA leads the world in both emissions reductions and oil and natural gas production. There’s no need to damage our economy to prove to the Paris climate conference how serious we are about reducing emissions. We’re already leading by example.
Jack Gerard, president and CEO, American Petroleum Institute; Washington, D.C.
We asked our followers what the USA should do to address climate change. Comments are edited for clarity and grammar:
The USA needs to educate people and give them photos of what will happen if they don’t start to change.
— @99Series2Oprah
Go nuclear in a big way, but don’t crush the economy with job-stifling legislation designed to kill fossil fuels.
— @yoktomsqueegee
I think the U.S. is doing enough. The other countries, well, that’s a different story.
— @AjayCnyc
Divest from fossil fuels and finance clean energy projects.
— @kaylaaa28
For more discussions, follow @USATOpinion or #tellusatoday.