The Paris conference on climate change is not intended to ban the use of fossil fuels as the op-ed, “Why the Paris accords matter to Connecticut,” (Nov. 29), would have us believe. Rather, it is intended to achieve restrictions on the use of such fuels, ideally by substituting other sources where they can be substituted effectively, so that the benefits to society of limited fossil fuel burning that the author correctly identifies (improved living conditions) can be continued and extended to more of the world’s population.

Unfortunately, his approach does a disservice to his thesis by using scare tactics to suggest demagogically that, if anything of substance results from the Paris meeting, we’ll be relegated to once again “heating our caves with wood fires.”

Eventually, the world will have to manage the manmade fraction of activities that cause global warming. Doing so sooner gives world leaders more choices in how to address the growing problem. Doing it later, inevitably will be more difficult costly and painful. Effective leadership is required if we are to do it now. This starts with leaders acting responsibly in Paris and returning home to fight for the agreement in the court of public opinion. 

Eric Smith

Groton