Letter to the editor: We need clean air in Pittsburgh | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: We need clean air in Pittsburgh

Our community wants and needs clean air.

Pittsburgh City Councilwoman Erika Strassburger held a listening session on air quality in Pittsburgh June 26 in East Liberty. I was impressed with the meeting and proud of my fellow Pittsburghers for speaking out about their knowledge of and experience with our poor air quality.

One of my main takeaways was that, yes, Pittsburgh’s air 50 years ago was horrible. The smog and soot would coat clothing and make it difficult to see. However, that does not mean our air quality is good enough now.

Air pollution still kills several hundred Pittsburghers annually. Pollution from US Steel’s Clairton plant is being swept into our neighborhoods. People spoke about developing asthma and other terrible conditions since moving to Pittsburgh, after being healthy their entire lives.

We are in a canyon full of industrial pollution, and this affects us all. Clean, breathable air needs to be a priority because dirty air does not discriminate. The sickening effects of dirty air harm us all, especially our children.

I want to thank Strassburger for the eye-opening event and call on all of Pittsburgh’s elected officials to value the health of their constituents over industrial interests.

Jennifer Sybrandt

Oakland

The writer is an intern with PennEnvironment (pennenvironment.org).


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.