Stephen Jurovics: A long-term benefit
08/25/2014 5:42 PM
08/25/2014 5:43 PM
The proposed EPA rules for reductions in carbon emissions from fossil fuel plants will continue to generate strong comments and influence the November elections in North Carolina and beyond. The discussions appear dominated by a short-term perspective and a long-term one.
Opponents of the rules point to short-term effects such as possible increases in costs, losses of jobs or damages to the coal industry.
Supporters of the rules point to long-term effects, such as slowing the buildup of carbon in the atmosphere and reducing all the adverse effects of climate change. These include storm surges (coastal North Carolina is particularly vulnerable), heat waves, water evaporation, droughts and tornadoes. Additional benefits of the rules include near-term improvements in air quality and consequent benefits to our health.
My faith as well as the physical evidence motivate me to “choose life,” to stand with the supporters. We risk irreversible damage to future generations by opposing the required changes in our generation. Governments at all levels can lessen the pain of those adversely affected through thoughtful and comprehensive planning. Let us choose life, our health and the viability of future generations over expediency.
Editor's Choice Videos
Join the Discussion
News & Observer is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.