Be cautious of fracking claims
Living in Western Pennsylvania, it is not hard to understand why fracking is such a potent political force. The abundant natural gas beneath our feet provides not only fuel for home heating and electric power plants, but also a feedstock for manufacturing plastic, both of which translate to a strong regional economy.
Natural gas producers also argue that it provides a path to a low-carbon future as a cleaner, greenhouse gas, compared with coal power. They tout it as a short-term but important bridge toward the goal of mitigating climate change. Unfortunately, that claim fails to meet the smell test due to leaks and flares from gas wells.
No, I am not referring to the odor of chemicals added to the gas to alert us to leaks in our homes. I am referring to odorless methane gas, which is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
As the Post-Gazette notes in the Aug. 11 article “EPA to Lift Methane Controls,” those producers welcome the Environmental Protection Agency’s rollback of controls on methane leakage. Any claimed environmental advantage of natural gas over coal goes up in smoke by allowing more methane to leak.
Still, no one likes more government regulation than necessary, which is why the Citizens’ Climate Lobby has actively supported the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act (H.R. 763), which reduces regulation and substitutes market-based incentives. I invite my fellow Western Pennsylvanians to visit cclusa.org to learn more about it.
ALFRED B. BORTZ The writer is a member of the Pittsburgh chapter of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby.
Important source
We are residents of Pittsburgh and surrounding communities, and we rely on the Pittsburgh-Post Gazette for news. We appreciate the important role that this news source provides.
Our community stands against racism, and therefore is following up on the University of Pittsburgh’s September 2019 report on race inequality, published in the Post-Gazette last September, that so alarmingly details Pittsburgh at the bottom of the country largely across the board on outcomes for Black women (Sept. 18, “The Disparities Are Striking: Report: Pittsburgh’s Black Population Trails Other Cities in Quality of Life”).
Illustrative of this, we have seen no Post-Gazette news coverage of a Black woman from Washington, D.C., Dannielle Brown, on a hunger strike at Duquesne University for over 40 days as she waits for complete information surrounding the tragic death of her son, Marquis Jaylen Brown, a junior at the university. This story has been carried in The Washington Post, yet to our disappointment we have not seen its reporting in the Post-Gazette.
Among the many stories that the Post-Gazette covers, what rationale justifies not reporting on this tragic situation? Suppressing such stories perpetuates the problems detailed in the 2019 report on race inequality. If Pittsburgh is going to improve its outcomes for Black people, then our primary news sources need to be held accountable in covering news affecting people of color. As Duquense University has responded with an open letter to address Ms. Brown’s concerns, this is important news that is still developing. Perhaps this has been covered in recent days and we missed it; yet on the other hand, as residents who like to stay informed, how is this not newsworthy?
ELLEN HUGHES Edgewood This letter was signed by 15 other residents of the Pittsburgh area.
Outside the box
The assertion that Joe Biden boxed himself in and, therefore, “blew it” is not supported by common sense (Aug. 13 editorial “Why Biden Blew It”).
As a population, women outnumber men, and it is high time their perspective is brought to the highest levels of government. It’s no guarantee of improvement, but it is a guarantee of fresh thinking.
As a population, Blacks are a huge minority — a rather large “box” to be boxed into.
Could there be a white male candidate better suited to the role? Maybe — but in the current times when we need someone to bridge the divide, I don’t know how.
The editorial board needs to think about what it is trying to say. I find the editorial to be borderline sexist and racist.
JOE BARRY
Ross