It was sad to read a recent opinion extolling what has become the conservative view that global warming does not exist (Letters, Herald, Nov. 7). In The Good Earth section of the very same issue, the lead article reported not only that carbon dioxide content in Earth’s atmosphere was recently measured at its highest level in centuries. The story went on to confirm that higher C02 levels come from fossil-fuel emissions, known to contribute to atmospheric warming. Seriously, while it is sad that conservatives and liberals are so polarized from each other on issues such as gun control, taxing the wealthy, abortion and gay marriage, it truly is sad that an issue that can affect the future of life on Earth is also a vitriolic red vs. blue area of disagreement.
Whether you believe in global warming or not, what’s the downside of working to reduce the amount of C02 in our air? Isn’t it obvious to anyone that a centuries-high level of C02 is just not a good thing and needs to be reduced?
And by the way, here’s the upside of working on C02 reduction in addition to helping our planet: The post-recession economic doldrums are chiefly happening because before the recession, 70 percent of our economy was based on consumer spending. Post-recession, people are just not consuming as they did before, and there is nothing economically on the horizon to take up the slack. What we need to kick start us back to national prosperity is a new economic boom. What better way to create new jobs, grow the economy and, by the way, to also reduce C02 content to extend the life of our planet at the same time, than to push Congress to pave the way for going hard into all forms of alternative energy sources to get rid of our dependence on fossil fuels.
For the life of our planet to be a red-vs.-blue issue? That’s downright pathetic and embarrassing.