Colorado needs nuclear power; publish information about the protective helmet; cut CU’s “conservative thinking” stance; pump pain is also on Biden; climate education is essential


Paul Bauman: Nuclear: Properly Noted Opinion on State Energy Needs

As a lifelong Democrat, I agree with Republican candidate William DeOreo’s guest comment urging policymakers to explore advanced nuclear reactors. Mr. DeOreo rightly points out that Colorado will become too dependent on intermittent renewable energy from wind turbines and solar panels. Mr. DeOreo is also right to focus on the need for a clean energy supply system, not just one technology, especially as we retire coal plants. And we environmentalists in Boulder need to think about the enormous amounts of land and environmental damage that a fully renewable approach will require. Indeed, smaller, cheaper, and safer advanced nuclear reactors provide clean energy 24/7 that renewables simply cannot. Storage? The world’s largest battery created by Tesla in Australia would power the state of Arizona for less than a minute.

Unfortunately, Mr. DeOreo added some partisan and controversial comments about the “Democrat-led Legislature” and Xcel Energy being oblivious to the need for clean energy from nuclear power. I think it’s more effective for conservationists to encourage Colorado’s energy policymakers to pursue clean energy goals, not just renewable energy as the only solution. And maybe we can do it with a bipartisan approach.

Paul Bauman, Boulder

Mike Brundage: Motorcycles: publish information on protective helmets and safety equipment

I request on my behalf and on behalf of other motorcyclists that, wherever possible, in reporting on motorcycle accidents, especially fatalities, the author include information about the helmet and safety equipment that was used by the injured motorcyclist at the time of the incident.

Mike Brundage, Boulder

Kevin Schaefer: John Eastman: eliminating the “conservative thinking” position

Yes, of course the University of Colorado should investigate John Eastman. Public hearings last month revealed that Eastman was the key architect of the January 6 coup attempt, the greatest threat to our democracy since the Civil War. Did Eastman use UC resources like email and travel funds to plan the coup? Does CU have any evidence, such as documents and emails crucial to Congressional and Justice Department investigations into the coup attempt? CU owes it to our country and the health of our democracy to investigate Eastman.

CU should immediately eliminate the pulpit of conservative thinking, in response to the lame argument that an investigation into Eastman would put the pulpit at risk. I work at CU, and the chair of conservative thought has been an embarrassment since the day the regents founded it. The Regents created the pulpit to spread ‘diversity of thought’ i.e. conservative thinking, as we cannot tolerate liberal thinking on campus. The embarrassment has increased because Eastman has now turned the post into what I consider the pulpit of seditious thought. The top three issues facing UC students today are tuition fees, rising fees, and housing costs. Diversity of thought isn’t even among the top 100 issues facing CU. Now is the time to weed out the pulpit of conservative thinking and do something useful with the funds, simultaneously removing the stain on CU’s reputation by John Eastman.

Kevin Schaefer, Longmont

Carl Brady: Gas prices: Biden’s politics deserve blame for the increase

Gregory Iwan’s June 20 column, “A Few Facts About Oil Prices,” referenced one of my May 22 letters. I’m a bit perplexed by his concluding sentences: “I respect Mr. Brady’s comments. But I doubt their validity.

I began this letter with two quotes from historian Victor Davis Hanson regarding the left’s longstanding belief that the only way to achieve its goal of discouraging driving was to encourage high fuel prices.

Next, I recounted my personal experience in 1997, where I overheard senior Clinton administration officials discussing the use of high gas prices to discourage Americans from driving. I said it showed that the idea has been around for a long time on the left. I am intrigued by the part of what I wrote that Mr. Iwan found invalid.

Mr Iwan argues that our current high fuel prices are “due to Vladimir Putin and all of us”. By “all of us” he seems to be saying that the increased demand from all of us driving more has driven gas prices up. The data does not support this. Less driving due to COVID lockdowns from March 2020 appears to be the reason for the average price of regular gasoline in the United States to drop to $1.77 on April 27, 2020. But it had reinstated to Biden’s inauguration date.

From Biden’s inauguration to Putin’s invasion, the average price of gasoline rose from about $2.40 to $3.50, or almost 50%. This increase can be attributed almost solely to Biden’s declared war on fossil fuels. The price has risen at an even faster rate since then from a combination of Putin and Biden, reaching the almost unbelievable level of over $5.00 in mid-June this year. Without Biden’s actions and inactions, we would have had enough oil and gas to mitigate much of the disruption caused by Putin’s invasion.

Carl Brady, Frederick

Bruce Allen: Environment: ringing the communal bell for education

Earlier this year, the Daily Camera published an Earth health update in Section A titled “Earthweek.”

Three of the categories of information included were: “Cactus vs. Heat”, “Endangered Insects”, and “Hurricane Extremes”.

Many of us enjoyed this part of your article. The Denver Post, and I suspect other major newspapers, have not published such an overview. Why?

The key to change is education — it always has been. Our free press must ring the communal bell.

Thank you, daily camera.

Bruce Allen, Louisville

Source link


About Author

Comments are closed.