Letter to the editor: Energy innovation & Carbon Dividend Act | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Energy innovation & Carbon Dividend Act

Thank you for your coverage of Europe’s efforts to cut greenhouse gas pollution in the steel industry. If the world is to achieve near zero greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century (which is what scientists say is needed to keep the earth’s climate in the range that has supported human civilization), then we need to move forward with innovation across many sectors — from power generation to manufacturing to energy efficiency.

The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act introduced in the U.S. House would spur innovation by putting a price on greenhouse gas pollution. This bill would return the money from the fee on pollution to the people in the form of a monthly dividend. This effective bill is projected to cut emissions 40% in the first 12 years.

The bill also has a border adjustment fee for energy-intensive goods like steel. A fee would be assessed on steel imports if the country sending the steel to the U.S. did not have a similar carbon price. This would protect domestic steel production while encouraging low-carbon innovation.

Let’s call on Reps. Mike Doyle and Conor Lamb and Sens. Pat Toomey and Bob Casey to support this bipartisan legislation that is good for people and the planet.

Dana Siler

Squirrel Hill

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.