Improving our air
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Monday, July 8, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Recently, I had the distinct pleasure of providing opening remarks to organizations and companies interested in participating in Sustainable Pittsburgh's 2013-14 Green Workplace Challenge. This friendly contest is supported by the Heinz Endowments' Breathe Project. The focus of the program is to encourage sustainable actions and achievements, including focused reduction in energy, water, waste and transportation. It engages employees directly, as well as the leadership of the participating organizations.
Likewise, the Breathe Project is a coalition of organizations working together to clean up our air for the health of our families and economy. In addition to working with member companies and organizations, the project also offers ways for individuals to participate and take action that has a real impact on our environment and our region's health. I am proud to be part of the Breathe Project leadership team and am grateful for Heinz Endowments support of this effort.
Often, the Heinz Endowments are criticized within the industrial sector for being too critical of industry. We, as a community, cannot have it both ways. It is unfair to criticize the Heinz Endowments for being too tough on industry, then impugn the organization's credibility when its work improves the environment.
I am grateful for the Heinz Endowments' involvement and interest in improving our air quality. They have been strong partners with Allegheny County in our individual and collective efforts and vocal proponents of steps — controversial and otherwise — that will improve our region's health in the short and long term. Real progress has been made in our community, much of it due to the Heinz Endowments and their leadership.
The writer, a Democrat, is Allegheny County chief executive.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Slots & property taxes
- Harmar needs better enforcement
- Medicaid’s future
- Putin’s actions I
- We pay to keep poor warm
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- Obama & Reaganomics I
- Obama & Reaganomics II