Letters to the Editor: New proposed EPA pollution limits are a good idea, but we need more
To the editor: I applaud the EPA’s new rules for fossil-fueled electricity generation. They are not "designed to shut down the coal fleet." They are crafted to give us a chance to meet the emissions reductions science tells us we need to avoid the worst effects of climate change.
Those effects include national security threats from energy market volatility, climate-induced migration exasperating the crisis at our borders, more severe weather, droughts, floods, heat waves, wildfires, and rising, warming and acidifying seas.
As for costs, I'd rather discover in 10 years that we overspent in reducing greenhouse gasses by a fraction of a percent of our GDP while improving our health and extending our life expectancy rather than discover we haven't done enough to preserve a healthy climate where we all can thrive.
Tom Hazelleaf, Seal Beach
..
To the editor: While I'm thrilled to see the EPA proposing limits on carbon pollution, I worry that the regulatory process is too slow and fraught with legal challenges to get the job done. Wouldn't it be easier to impose an increasing carbon tax paired with a rebate sent back to U.S. households to offset the increased costs? A carbon tax would encourage all sectors of the economy to reduce emissions rather than rely on a piecemeal approach regulating various sources of carbon pollution individually. A carbon tax would be quicker to implement and help us reach Biden's carbon reduction targets by 2030. A target we desperately need to meet.
Gerda Newbold, Santa Monica
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
