Town Hall participants brainstorm ideas for a Green New Deal in Westmoreland | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

Town Hall participants brainstorm ideas for a Green New Deal in Westmoreland

Jeff Himler
1223014_web1_gtr-GreenDeal1-052919
Jeff Himler | Tribune-Review
Ryan Vesely (center), president of Green Solar Systems, and Mike Pardus (right), a leader with hosting organization Voice of Westmoreland, take part in a break-out discussion near the end of a town hall meeting on the Green New Deal held Wednesday, May 29, 2019, at The Lamplighter restaurant in Delmont.
1223014_web1_gtr-GreenDeal2-053019
Jeff Himler | Tribune-Review
Ryan Vesely (left), president of Green Solar Systems, discusses Green New Deal issues as fellow panel member Amanda Goodman, a Hempfield Area teacher, looks on during a town hall meeting held Wednesday, May 29, 2019, at The Lamplighter restaurant in Delmont.

Local proponents of the envisioned economic transformation dubbed the Green New Deal argue that regional jobs tied to the fossil fuel industry can be replaced with ones that are focused on environmentally friendly energy sources such as hydroelectric, wind and solar power.

That was one of the ideas discussed Wednesday evening during a town hall meeting about the Green New Deal that drew close to 50 people to The Lamplighter restaurant in Delmont.

“This is not some pie-in-the-sky dream,” said Mike Pardus, among the leaders of local activist group Voice of Westmoreland, which organized the meeting. “It’s about things we can do right here in Westmoreland County today, now, if we have the wherewithal to work together to make it happen.

“We have a lot of very skilled, hard-working people who know how to get things done in Pennsylvania. If you’re drilling a hole in the ground for fracking, you can drill a hole in the ground for geothermal energy.”

U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., introduced non-binding Green New Deal resolutions in February that called for replacing fossil fuels like coal, natural gas and oil with renewable energy.

The Republican majority in the Senate defeated the resolutions in March. Ocasio-Cortez said more specific proposals would follow.

“We think the public story about this idea has been portrayed in a way that doesn’t reflect the reality of what it could do for us in Westmoreland,” said Clare Dooley, co-founder of Voice of Westmoreland. “The concept is an overall transformation of our economy to make it work for everyone and to be, in fact, a real New Deal — like the first New Deal (during President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s administration) that recognized real economic inequalities in our society and came up with solutions.”

Dooley said arguments that weigh jobs against the environment are “a false choice. We can create a Green New Deal that works for everyone.”

Town hall panel member Ryan Vesely, president of Greensburg-based solar system supplier Green Solar Systems, said the Green New Deal should include updating of the nation’s electrical grid. “We have some infrastructure that’s still 70 years old,” he said, arguing the system would be more efficient and reliable if it was replaced with smaller “micro-grids” that deliver power from sources closer to each community.

In a smaller break-out session, Vesely voiced support for Senate Bill 600, which would increase requirements for the percentage of power sold in the state that is to be generated from renewable sources to 30 percent by 2030, including 10 percent from solar energy.

Fellow panel member Pat McCaughtry, eastern U.S. officer manager for the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, called for “mass transit solutions that will free up many of us from the burden of driving and maintaining a car.”

Amanda Goodman, a middle school teacher in the Hempfield Area School District who took part in contract negotiations for her union, decried the “lack of public transit that is unheard of in other countries” while asking, “Why don’t all workers get paid more?” — whether or not they are represented by a union.

During the meeting’s break-out sessions, audience members and moderators discussed other proposed initiatives that might be included in a Green New Deal: Upgrading buildings to achieve increased energy efficiency; using carbon taxes and taxes on the wealthy to pay for infrastructure programs; investing in training and reemployment programs for those displaced through elimination of jobs in the fossil fuel industry; creating a new Civilian Conservation Corps that would employ people in such efforts as planting trees and restoring land affected by acid mine drainage; making a “massive investment” in U.S. manufacturing industries to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

“This is just to start people talking about and thinking about what the Green New Deal could be and should be,” Dooley said. “Once we’ve done that, then we start talking about how to make it happen. We want to be part of the planning and discussion of how to make that happen.”

She said a follow-up discussion on the topic will be held at the next regular Voice of Westmoreland meeting, set for 6 p.m. Wednesday in the Westmoreland Museum of American Art.

Jeff Himler is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jeff at 724-836-6622, [email protected] or via Twitter .

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.