It was refreshing to read the Sept. 12 editorial “Setting a New Standard” about a rare instance of bipartisanship involving U.S. Reps. Conor Lamb, D-Mt. Lebanon, and Guy Reschenthaler, R-Peters. The imperative to provide needed services to veterans rightly transcends politics. There is another critically important issue, the pervasive and growing impacts of climate change, that demands nonpartisan, practical, fact-based solutions.
The best resource for climate facts is the 2018 report “Global Warming of 1.5 C” by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The report makes it clear that we must explore all possible solutions. That includes solar, wind, hydro and geothermal — but also nuclear, carbon capture and storage, bioenergy and other potential energy sources.
The heightened attention to climate in the Democratic presidential campaign is encouraging. However, not all candidate plans are well informed by science. Excluding potential nuclear or CCS solutions to the looming crisis ignores the expert scientific guidance summarized by the IPCC. In his Aug. 14 town hall, U.S. Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Forest Hills, sought a more inclusive and potentially bipartisan framework.
The scientific and economic communities agree that effective climate action requires carbon pricing. The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act implements a steadily rising carbon price, returns all proceeds to citizens, and protects U.S. industry with fees on carbon-intensive imports. It also gives credit for carbon capture and exempts the agricultural sector and the military. It’s a measured approach that doesn’t pick winners and one that should appeal across the aisle to Mr. Reschenthaler, Mr. Lamb and Mr. Doyle.
Robert R. Mitchell
Murrysville
First Published: September 20, 2019, 4:00 a.m.