To the Editor,
Re: Give the kids a fighting chance, Letter, June 26
Amazingly, Wayne DeLuca and I agree: we’re looking for a better world for the next generation. We diverge on how that can be accomplished.
Nothing has improved human well-being more than access to low-cost, plentiful energy, and that is provided almost entirely by fossil fuels. Because it is 85 percent of our energy supply, rejecting the use of fossil fuel would have a catastrophic effect on human life.
You may want to speculate on the effect eliminating fossil fuels would have on transportation, farming, and home heating. I have.
Of course, while the strident and naive activists demand a complete end to carbon based fuels, our cynical political leaders claim they can modify our energy thirst by raising prices. How high to raise the price? Well too little to fully change our habits but enough to raise a lot of money for their political waste.
And as law professor Glen Reynolds says, “I’ll believe it’s a crisis when those who tell me it’s a crisis start acting like it’s a crisis.”
The public seems unconcerned that increased energy costs directly raise costs for all things.
Need I mention, poor people pay the greatest price? Higher prices have little effect on the wealthy.
Mr. DeLuca presents the view that high energy prices are necessary to save us. I take the view they are unjustified and will destroy us.
Mr. Deluca claims I reject science, implying that he follows it. Neither of us though, are primary climate researchers. We both instead, rely on information derived from others. In my case, those who reject a belief that an increase in carbon dioxide will be catastrophic for the Earth and human life. That view is supported by the geological history, showing both a healthy, earlier Earth with far higher levels of CO2 and virtually no correlation of temperature to CO2 levels as well.
Is misinformation rampant? When taxes are involved, be skeptical. You decide … are your taxes being well spent?