Page 21

Loading...
Tips: Click on articles from page
Page 21 5,396 viewsPrint | Download

We can halt climate change right now

TO THE EDITOR:

Pretty scary stuff is happening to our climate lately – droughts and floods, hurricanes and wildfires. It’s not easy to think or talk about climate change.

But there is good news you may not know about.

There’s a way to reduce carbon emissions, put money in people’s pockets, and meet global deadlines to slow down global warming. Over 3,500 U.S. economists endorse this approach. It does not create new bureaucracies or regulatory snarls. It costs the federal budget nothing.

What is this policy? It is “Carbon Fee and Dividend.” A fee of $15 per ton of carbon would be charged on fossil fuels when it is extracted from the ground. Ninety-nine percent of all the money collected would then be returned equally to American taxpayers in monthly checks, just like the Covid stimulus checks. (The other 1% pays for administration.) The carbon fee would increase each year, driving emissions down rapidly while giving businesses the ability to plan ahead, and increasing the monthly dividend that would arrive in your bank account or mailbox.

At this very moment, the U.S. Senate is considering carbon fees, but they have not yet crafted a bill that is cost-neutral and non-regulatory. If carbon pricing with a full dividend cashback sounds like a good idea to you, please call or email Senators Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen. Tell them to champion “Carbon Fee and Dividend.”

We don’t have to be scared of global warming, if we simply take this bold action now. It’s a win-win.

SUSAN RICHMAN
DURHAM


Solar subsidies hurt lower-income people

TO THE EDITOR:

There was recently an editorial in your media which claimed New Hampshire needs to increase monetary support for solar energy projects (“Why the state should beef up solar in energy strategy,” July 16-29 NH Business Review).

Many of those projects, probably the majority, are purchased by middle- and upper-middle class people as well as the wealthy. The cost is distributed around to the ratepayers and taxpayers. While the people with the solar get free (to them) loans and grants, this arrangement leaves the poor with higher rates! How long must we continue this reverse Robin Hood scheme?

KERRY CROUSE
NASHUA


Have your own NH opinion?

Send it to EDITOR@NHBR.COM


See also