Screaming Penguin - Source Does Matter

This is a letter I wanted to share with the TotSP subscribers. I feel very strongly about this letter and this issue and hope that if you share my concerns you also act on the matter (I do realize that not everyone will share my views, but if you read the letter I think you will find that I am trying to be fair and objective.) Please email or call your Senators, Representative and the President.

You can find out about your representation and get direct links to their sites and email forms at senate.gov, house.gov, and whitehouse.gov respectively.

Dear Sir (Madam),

I am a citizen, a constituent and a concerned person and I feel compelled to write you this quick note because of the recent events surrounding power plant emissions. I am sure you are familiar with this issue. My concern is not because I am an environmental zealot; I do not consider myself to be an unreasonable or dogmatic person. Quite the contrary my approach and feelings are based on real concerns for the environment, the economy and the overall health of everyone.

Specifically the recent decision to NOT regulate Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions at fossil fuel burning power plants (coal) is very alarming. I feel that the government has done a reasonably good job of enacting and enforcing fair environmental laws in the last few years and yet in this most recent case the government has failed (regardless of blame or fault).

CO2 emissions are a real greenhouse gas and the greenhouse effect itself is absolutely real. This is not a "hoax" or a conclusion based on a "lack of evidence" as some people claim (I would also point out that it is mainly industry and "studies" paid for by industry that propagate the "myth" of greenhouse gases). Greenhouse gases and the effects thereof are a real thing and in fact a good thing. Let me clarify, a good thing to a degree. Very simply put the temperature of the Earth is based on how much energy the Earth absorbs from the Sun, and how much it reflects back. Atmospheric conditions, clouds and even the ground absorb that energy and warm the Earth. Scientific data shows that this is normal (for us) and is the reason why the Earth is our beautiful and habitable home (NOAA and American Geophysical Union based "data"). However, scientific data also shows that our environment can be altered significantly by natural occurrences and our own actions. "Acts of God," such as volcanic eruptions, also emit greenhouse gases including C02, and these have been proven to have an effect on the temperature of the Earth. These natural occurrences can and do have effects but the amount of emissions is minor in comparison to the amount we emit when burning fossil fuels. This is a very serious matter and we should treat it as such.

Another point to consider is that even if the data is ignored and we hypothetically (or otherwise) state that we are unsure about the effects of greenhouse gases we should still take precautions based on the possibilities. This is analogous to engineers making buildings and bridges stronger than they have to be, or doctors running additional tests to be sure about the causes of disease, and countless other "just to be on the safe side" techniques. If we even suspect for one second that we may be causing global climactic changes that will be adverse, regardless of science (which confirms that we are and therefore is irresponsible to disregard), are we not then compelled to include some "margin or error" in our decisions and policies? What is the penalty for being wrong, and what is reward for being correct. When human humanity and all of life on Earth may be in the balance why is it even debated whether or not we should proceed with all the caution possible?

I realize that the concerns about regulating emissions are mainly economic. We have the technologies to do things a better way, to do things "the right way", yet we do not employ these technologies because they may be "costly." What price can we put on clean air and a stable planetary atmosphere? I fear that even economically this recent decision may be disastrous. What will it cost us later to "clean up" an atmospheric mess. Can this even be done? What about the potential costs of the impacts of global warming such as global weather changes, polar ice cap melt and global food production? I am concerned about economics as well, but we all need to recognize the economic impact of NOT controlling, reducing and eventually eliminating greenhouse gases.

It is time that America takes a leading role in global environmental issues and shows the foresight to recognize both the environmental and economic implications of this issue. Please consider this issue carefully and do some research on your own to make sure that you have the real "facts." Once you have the information I am confident you will agree that we need to address this as soon as possible and we need to limit all greenhouse gas emissions including C02.

Please also note that I am a voter and I will be carefully keeping track of how you and other decision makers deal with these issues. The American people and indeed the people of the world are counting on you to make the right choices. I will be watching your record on this and other issues carefully and voting accordingly.

Sorry about the obvious politics on the penguin, but hey, this is an open content system and I felt this was important enough to address. If you have concerns or feelings you can respond or comment in the comments section or even post your own stories (so don't blame me if this is not bent your way, although lets hope we can all agree on something like harmful power plant emissions).