Letter to the editor: Commit to renewable energy in Pittsburgh |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Commit to renewable energy in Pittsburgh

On a recent drive with my mom from sunny LA to San Francisco, I couldn’t help but notice the windmills all around me, like big, elegant lace flowers with their own rhythm. And I wondered: Why doesn’t Pittsburgh, the city of my childhood, have windmills? Do we have less wind? Why aren’t all of our houses roofed with solar panels like they are in California?

I’ve seen Pittsburgh improve so much in the past few years. It’s become a hip and affordable city for young people to study and live. So why are we still using natural gas and coal as our main energy sources? We have moved past the days of the industrial era, when there was a constant layer of smog in the air. However, studies still find that one in every three days in Pittsburgh is a “bad air day.”

I want to see our city improve and grow with technology and science, not stay stuck in the past. Green-energy initiatives are a perfect way to do this. We can significantly reduce the impacts of climate change by transitioning Pennsylvania to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050. State Reps. Ed Gainey, D-Lincoln-Lemington, and Adam Ravenstahl, D-Summer Hill, are already on board to support legislation to accomplish this goal.

If clean air and water and healthy ecosystems are important to you, then please show your support for committing to renewable energy. It’s not for us; it’s for our children.

Jamie Sternlicht

Squirrel Hill

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.