Readers Respond

Part 7. Climate and Energy Series There has been a stimulating range of responses to this series so far, as you can see below. I want to work in as many of your contributions as possible as we move forward.

Not all renewables are equal.

• “I believe – at least in the case of Burlington, VT – that ‘renewables’ include hydroelectric, which destroys a river’s ecosystem. (Fish ladders do not work.)”
• “Beware of hydroelectric power. Dams destroy ecosystems and human cultures. Energy policy must recognize the need to rebuild the world's great fisheries, from the Mekong to the Columbia.”
• “Nova Scotia’s forests are being decimated to supply woody biomass to generate steam-powered electricity, which is one of the most inefficient uses of wood and is more polluting than coal – but since trees are considered a renewable resource, industry and governments can use them to meet renewable energy quotas. Using whole trees to generate power devalues the forests to the point where the wood is considered trash, which provides little incentive for woodlot owners to improve their trees. We rarely hear the word ‘tree’ used to describe the makeup of our mixed forests. The buzz phrase is ‘woody biomass.’ Wood here is now sold by the ton, not by the cord.”

Nor are all investments.

• “NRG Energy has led the charge among traditional fossil-fuel companies to implement green-energy portfolios. But short-term investors became dissatisfied with the current share price and pressured NRG to shed its long-term focus on alternative energy and go back to concentrating on fossil fuels. We need to start putting our money where our principles are and investing in our future, instead of just talking about it.”

Please join the conversation – to disagree, to suggest innovative solutions, to provide new ways of framing the issues: jamesgblaine2@gmail.com.