Science shows need to move from fossil fuels, nuclear
The column, "Did you vote for Green New Deal silliness" (March 5), indeed is notable for its pretense and faulty science. To begin, one would think that a writer representing a business consulting firm would be aware of the cascading economic and environmental disaster that is fracking for natural gas. Many major investors have come to realize that enormous debts will never be repaid; the result being that additional funds for expanding drilling operations are often now being denied. Natural gas on all fronts is a cleaner-burning fuel than, as example here, coal. But a key issue is that methane, the main component of natural gas, is itself an important greenhouse cause which in the short term is more effective in trapping heat than is carbon dioxide, the usual focus of discussion.
Methane leaks are common in all natural gas procurement and delivery systems, including fracking. In another example the author makes the common erroneous observation that nuclear power doesn't emit any greenhouse gases. In fact, all of mining, isotope enrichment, transport and disposal of nuclear fuel generate significant flows of carbon dioxide, as does the production of huge quantities of concrete utilized in construction of reactor facilities.
As for fossil, soon the energy used to extract a unit will exceed its energy content.
Robert L. Methot
Stories that may interest you
The next two years may be two of the most fascinating in American history. Consider news reports that various top government figures appear to be involved in a conspiracy to remove a president from office through illegal means. There is truly an historic investigation, after a two-year...
It seems the liberals among us are becoming increasingly fragile, triggered by anything that isn't bracketed into their ideological views. The free exchange of ideas is the cornerstone of the First Amendment, but to the garden variety leftist this only seems to apply if those exchanges are...
Me thinks the snowflakes protest too much! The Day should keep Lee Elci and a wider variety of other voices to have a diversity of opinion in its newspaper. The Day's editorial board is so reliably against any common sense financial or social conservatism that some sort of counterweight is...
As someone who finds this newspaper as vile as much of today’s journalism unfortunately is, I nonetheless continue to spend (way too much) money purchasing it. It is good to know one’s enemy. The articles contain obvious programming in what The Day wants readers to think and...