Can the EPA propose more limits on pollution?

To the editor: I applaud the EPA’s new guidelines for fossil-fueled electrical energy era. They aren’t “designed to close down the coal fleet.” They’re crafted to present us an opportunity to fulfill the emissions reductions science tells us we have to keep away from the worst results of local weather change.

These results embrace nationwide safety threats from vitality market volatility, climate-induced migration exasperating the disaster at our borders, extra extreme climate, droughts, floods, warmth waves, wildfires, and rising, warming and acidifying seas.

As for prices, I’d fairly uncover in 10 years that we overspent in lowering greenhouse gasses by a fraction of a p.c of our GDP whereas bettering our well being and increasing our life expectancy fairly than uncover we haven’t achieved sufficient to protect a wholesome local weather the place all of us can thrive.

Tom Hazelleaf, Seal Seaside

..

To the editor: Whereas I’m thrilled to see the EPA proposing limits on carbon air pollution, I fear that the regulatory course of is simply too gradual and fraught with authorized challenges to get the job achieved. Wouldn’t or not it’s simpler to impose an rising carbon tax paired with a rebate despatched again to U.S. households to offset the elevated prices? A carbon tax would encourage all sectors of the economic system to scale back emissions fairly than depend on a piecemeal method regulating numerous sources of carbon air pollution individually. A carbon tax can be faster to implement and assist us attain Biden’s carbon discount targets by 2030. A goal we desperately want to fulfill.

Gerda Newbold, Santa Monica