Your April 5 op-ed “Work to reduce fossil fuels” takes issue with the Council for a Secure America, which seeks to promote domestic oil and gas production and decrease reliance on Middle East oil. The authors wish instead to move away from fossil fuels to combat climate change, but there are two problems with this stance.
First, the idea that human activities create climate change is by no means a certainty. For example, most recently the Economist magazine noted (“Climate Science, a Sensitive Matter,” March 30th) that “over the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar.” This has led them to conclude that “the climate may be heating up less in response to greenhouse-gas emissions than was once thought.”
Secondly, the op-ed would like us to choose green energy over fossil fuels. However this is not simply a matter of choice. The basic chemistry of energy production shows why wind and solar can only provide a small fraction of the energy humans depend upon. As Robert Bryce (“Power Hungry”) and others have explained, the truth is in the numbers.