Archive

ShareThis Page
EPA not the problem | TribLIVE.com
News

EPA not the problem

Tribune-Review
| Tuesday, November 25, 2014 9:00 p.m

Regarding the letter “EPA impoverishing seniors”: Pennsylvania’s electricity system is not “at risk of failing.” In 2012, Pennsylvania exported more energy than any other state in the union and it continues to build more power plants.

The EPA does not control the price of energy; energy companies do. The rule to limit carbon dioxide from new and existing power plants will save money in health-care costs and climate-change adaptation. Nationwide, we’ve spent $7 billion re-creating shorelines that are at risk of being swallowed by sea-level rise.

Pennsylvania and the country spend plenty of money supporting the coal industry. Pennsylvania exempts coal from sales tax, losing $120 million every year. Nationally, we lose another $80 million by taxing coal royalties as capital gains rather than as income. Another $40 million is given to coal companies for the clean-up and closure of mines and waste sites. We lost $1 billion in 2011 in the form of cheap leases for coal mining on federal lands not designated as coal-producing areas.

All of this could be used to help low-income citizens pay for energy. Climate change and coal pollution are dangerous and we cannot afford to keep paying off this industry.

Russell Zerbo

Philadelphia

The writer is a Clean Air Council (cleanair.org) advocacy coordinator.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.