ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Air-quality report misleads

| Thursday, May 17, 2018, 8:55 p.m.

April showers bring May flowers — and, apparently, misleading information from environmental groups about the historic progress the Pittsburgh region has made with respect to improving air quality while growing the economy at the same time.

The recent story “Pittsburgh region's air pollution worsening, report says” neglected to take the proper long-term view of air quality in the region — specifically, since 2001, ozone levels in the Pittsburgh have decreased by 27 percent, according to the most recent federal data. During that same time period, the region's population grew by nearly 4 percent and its GDP grew by 18 percent, while sulfur dioxide concentrations are 61 percent lower and fine particulate matter is down by more than a third. These numbers make clear that business leaders are taking great strides to improve sustainability.

Environmental advocates are pushing for restrictions on using American energy — whether that's shutting down power plants or blocking pipelines — when in fact we need all of our energy assets to further our economy and continue to improve the environment.

Kevin Sunday


The writer is director of government affairs for the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.

click me