What price should Americans put on a clean environment? Shall we pay more for electricity in order to breathe easier and live longer? According to David Ridenour and his think tank, even an attempt by President-elect Obama to increase quality of life for Americans by providing a cleaner environment would most certainly roll back all gains made over the past century and take us back to 1905 ("Vow would send U.S. economy back to 1905," Dec. 29).
It strains credibility to believe cutting emissions would lead to an elimination of every industrial, medical and technological advance over the past 100 years. Yet that's what Ridenour suggested without presenting evidence. There most certainly is a price to pay for taking care of our environment and combating climate change. Electricity rates will increase somewhat if the more expensive ways of generating clean power are used, yet there will be a dividend paid to people living in a cleaner and safer environment. If political leaders from times past listened to the David Ridenours, we would still see rivers lighting on fire, major cities with daily massive smog, and poisoned drinking water sickening many.
Another point to ponder was Ridenour's misrepresentation of Obama's energy plan. Obama is often quoted by his critics as stating that coal producers would go bankrupt and that his cap-and-trade system would skyrocket electrical rates. The fact that Obama stated these end results would be "unacceptable" showed his critics were practicing deception by omission. In other words, they were lying.
People like Ridenour are in the business of promoting a climate of fear at the expense of rational and scientific planning. Instead of listening to overheated rhetoric from partisan think tanks, we can all listen to the well-intentioned and long-range planning from people who don't promote fear.
James N. Bragge
ADVERTISEMENT
Carlton
