Regarding “Debate rages as Atlantic Coast pipeline nears construction” (July 24): The Atlantic Coast Pipeline is misguided. North Carolina should encourage clean, sustainable forms of energy like wind and solar farms. Jobs in the clean-energy sector will persist as that industry grows. Pipeline construction jobs will evaporate when construction is completed.
The ACP is dangerous. It will carry fracked methane, a climate pollutant 100 times worse than CO2. Pipeline equipment leaks and is deliberately vented. These releases of methane into the environment pose risks to climate, ground water, wetlands and people.
The ACP is unnecessary. It is said that the Marcellus Shale’s gas is running out. So an expensive, dangerous pipeline to burn fuel that hurts chances of surviving on the planet is being built. And that supply may soon run dry? That makes no sense. Duke Energy supports the ACP because its rate model is based on construction of gas-fired plants. The plants benefit shareholders, not Duke’s customers. Building the ACP is not what we should be doing to preserve our children and grandchildren’s chances for a livable planet.
Light rail ‘pork’
Regarding “Durham-Orange transit gets a green light” (July 2) and the funding of the Durham-Orange light rail project: Liberals like Rep. David Price talk about federal funding like it’s a magical pot of gold. The truth is that everyone in the country is going to be paying for a project that is possibly beneficial only to people who live in Durham and Chapel Hill.
There’s no reason for federal funding of this project, except to give Price something to brag about. If Price wants to waste my tax dollars on pork, I suggest he buy me a barbecue sandwich instead.
Solutions for gerrymandering
Money from the “super rich,” voter records databases, the computer and legislators’ desire to line their own pockets has taken away my vote unless it is a statewide or national election. Gerrymandering guarantees that the North Carolina General Assembly and representatives in Washington go to only one party. This is not the United States that its forefathers tried to create with the Constitution.
The Supreme Court could solve this “crime” with two simple rulings. (1) Define the “one person, one vote” criteria as population of persons eligible to vote – i.e. 18 and older. (2) Rule that the only data to be used in drawing federal and state election districts are the results found in the United States Census along with districts being as concentrated as possible and conforming to state lines.