Letter to the editor: Pittsburgh needs to go green | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Pittsburgh needs to go green

I support Mayor Bill Peduto’s opposition to the proposed petrochemical expansion in this region. Given we are at 412 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere and still increasing, the time for us to dither over shifting away from fossil fuel is over.

This whole thing smacks of greed and a lack of courage and imagination. If we tried, really tried, I’m sure we could attract truly green businesses here that would provide jobs for folks in the long term, without the environmental nightmares that the petrochemical industry has left in its wake. In regard to the Shell cracker plant in Beaver County, as Matt Mehalik of the Breathe Project has made clear, we paid way too much, $1.65 billion in tax breaks for 600 permanent jobs. Compared to New York state, which projects 40,000 jobs resulting from its investments in green tech, the average Pennsylvania taxpayer got screwed.

Also, we live with a plastics crisis. Plastic is present in our water, seafood and virtually everything else we can thing of, and its health effects are unknown. The last thing we need is more conventional plastic, but that’s the only way to keep the gas industry going: make something that they can shove out into the market and not be responsible for the damage it does.

Tim Kelly

Aleppo


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.