Letters 10-24-2016

It’s Obama’s 1984 Several editions ago I concluded a short letter to the editor with an ominous rhetorical flourish: “Welcome to George Orwell’s 1984 and the grand opening of the Federal Department of Truth!” At the time I am sure most of the readers laughed off my comments as right-wing hyperbole. Shame on you for doubting me...

Gun Bans Don’t Work It is said that mass violence only happens in the USA. A lone gunman in a rubber boat, drifted ashore at a popular resort in Tunisia and randomly shot and killed 38 mostly British and Irish tourists. Tunisian gun laws, which are among the most restrictive in the world, didn’t stop this mass slaughter. And in January 2015, two armed men killed 11 and wounded 11 others in an attack on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. French gun laws didn’t stop these assassins...

Scripps’ Good Deed No good deed shall go unpunished! When Dan Scripps was the 101st District State Representative, he introduced legislation to prevent corporations from contaminating (e.g. fracking) or depleting (e.g. Nestle) Michigan’s water table for corporate profit. There are no property lines in the water table, and many of us depend on private wells for abundant, safe, clean water. In the subsequent election, Dan’s opponents ran a negative campaign almost solely on the misrepresentation that Dan’s good deed was a government takeover of your private water well...

Political Definitions As the time to vote draws near it’s a good time to check into what you stand for. According to Dictionary.com the meanings for liberal and conservative are as follows:

Liberal: Favorable to progress or reform as in political or religious affairs.

Conservative: Disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditions and limit change...

Voting Takes A Month? Hurricane Matthew hit the Florida coast Oct. 6, over three weeks before Election Day. Bob Ross (Oct. 17th issue) posits that perhaps evacuation orders from Governor Scott may have had political motivations to diminish turnout and seems to praise Hillary Clinton’s call for Gov. Scott to extend Florida’s voter registration deadline due to evacuations...

Clinton Foundation Facts Does the Clinton Foundation really spend a mere 10 percent (per Mike Pence) or 20 percent (per Reince Priebus) of its money on charity? Not true. Charity Watch gives it an A rating (the same as it gives the NRA Foundation) and says it spends 88 percent on charitable causes, and 12 percent on overhead. Here is the source of the misunderstanding: The Foundation does give only a small percentage of its money to charitable organizations, but it spends far more money directly running a number of programs...

America Needs Change Trump supports our constitution, will appoint judges that will keep our freedoms safe. He supports the partial-birth ban; Hillary voted against it. Regardless of how you feel about Trump, critical issues are at stake. Trump will increase national security, monitor refugee admissions, endorse our vital military forces while fighting ISIS. Vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence will be an intelligent asset for the country. Hillary wants open borders, increased government regulation, and more demilitarization at a time when we need strong military defenses...

My Process For No I will be voting “no” on Prop 3 because I am supportive of the process that is in place to review and approve developments. I was on the Traverse City Planning Commission in the 1990s and gained an appreciation for all of the work that goes into a review. The staff reviews the project and makes a recommendation. The developer then makes a presentation, and fellow commissioners and the public can ask questions and make comments. By the end of the process, I knew how to vote for a project, up or down. This process then repeats itself at the City Commission...

Regarding Your Postcard If you received a “Vote No” postcard from StandUp TC, don’t believe their lies. Prop 3 is not illegal. It won’t cost city taxpayers thousands of dollars in legal bills or special elections. Prop 3 is about protecting our downtown -- not Munson, NMC or the Commons -- from a future of ugly skyscrapers that will diminish the very character of our downtown...

Vote Yes It has been suggested that a recall or re-election of current city staff and Traverse City Commission would work better than Prop 3. I disagree. A recall campaign is the most divisive, costly type of election possible. Prop 3, when passed, will allow all city residents an opportunity to vote on any proposed development over 60 feet tall at no cost to the taxpayer...

Yes Vote Explained A “yes” vote on Prop 3 will give Traverse City the right to vote on developments over 60 feet high. It doesn’t require votes on every future building, as incorrectly stated by a previous letter writer. If referendums are held during general elections, taxpayers pay nothing...

Beware Trump When the country you love have have served for 33 years is threatened, you have an obligation and a duty to speak out. Now is the time for all Americans to speak out against a possible Donald Trump presidency. During the past year Trump has been exposed as a pathological liar, a demagogue and a person who is totally unfit to assume the presidency of our already great country...

Picture Worth 1,000 Words Nobody disagrees with the need for affordable housing or that a certain level of density is dollar smart for TC. The issue is the proposed solution. If you haven’t already seen the architect’s rendition for the site, please Google “Pine Street Development Traverse City”...

Living Wage, Not Tall Buildings Our community deserves better than the StandUp TC “vote no” arguments. They are not truthful. Their yard signs say: “More Housing. Less Red Tape. Vote like you want your kids to live here.” The truth: More housing, but for whom? At what price..

Home · Articles · News · Other Opinions · Blowing Sunshine
. . . .

Blowing Sunshine

Stephen Tuttle - June 20th, 2011
It has now been about 35 years since we first started talking about
alternatives to fossil fuels. In that three and a half decades talk is
about all we’ve done.
To be sure there has been some incre-mental progress. Solar energy
technology has improved enough that converting sunshine to power is
easier. There is significantly more wind energy. Maine, for example, has
made a genuine commitment to wind energy and is progressing apace.
Geothermal energy production, however, seems to be still in it’s embryonic
stages and the dream of hydrogen fuel cells producing nearly perpetual
energy is still just that; a dream.
Democratic presidents Carter, Clinton and Obama all talked about the need
to make a commitment to alternative energy. We know they must have been
sincere because we’ve seen nice photos of them standing next to arrays of
solar collectors.
Republican presidents during the same arc of time have promised to find
more domestic oil and natural gas. They believe the solution to ending
our increasingly inane dependence on foreign oil is to start capturing the
fossil fuels we already know exist beneath us on land and under the oceans
off our coasts. Frankly, they haven’t been a lot more successful than
those promising alternatives.
It is time we decided. Are we going to seriously explore alternatives or
are we going to seriously go after our own fossil fuels?
The starting point for any debate on energy has to be the reality that
there is no such thing as absolutely clean energy. At least no such thing
we’ve yet discovered.
The manufacturing of wind turbines and solar panels involve mining (copper
wire) and manufacturing using petrochemicals. The transportation and
installation of the finished products present additional challenges.
Once up and running the energy produced is remarkably clean by today’s
standards but there are complaints by neighbors about shadow flicker and
noise and birds flying into the blades of wind turbines. Complaints about
the glare of solar panels and their lack of aesthetic compatibility with
residential neighborhoods also continue.
Additionally, costs continue to be prohibitive for individual use of both
solar and wind. Not all of us can afford to lay out $20,000 or more to
install a solar array on our roof or in our backyard. Wind turbine towers
are even more expensive and neighbors seem to get cranky if we try to
erect them in our back yards. Geothermal is breathtakingly expensive and
we’ve not yet really figured out how to affordably break hydrogen out of
the air or water to power fuel cells.
Perhaps more telling is the fact that the energy produced by all the
alternatives is currently so expensive it will have to be subsidized to be
affordable for most of us.
If we aren’t going to make the necessary commitment to overcome the
hurdles alternative energy presents, then maybe we should get busy finding
more fossil fuels.
There is still a lot of oil under the ground and offshore. Let’s get
Sure, there will be the occasional mishap but, what the hell, this is just
eggs and omelets. It’s even conceivable some clever engineer or designer
will finally come up with that elusive 100 miles per gallon, low emissions
engine. It could happen.
And we have a century or more of natural gas underground. It burns
cleaner than the gasoline we get from oil and, at least now, is cheaper.
That a lot of it is trapped thousands of feet underground is a problem
already solved by the invention of “fracking,” a process by which millions
of gallons of water infused with a cocktail of unknown chemicals (the
companies doing it claim the chemical mixture is proprietary and,
therefore, a secret) is blasted into the earth to disintegrate the pesky
shale in which and under which the natural gas lurks.
Yes, there have been a couple of incidents in which the gas and water
table sort of intermingled resulting in flaming tap water. And one
fracking operation recently blew up, but those kinds of incidents are
probably not going to happen often. Probably.
If we insist on going the fossil fuel route, we’re going to have to accept
the occasional BP-type spill at a well site, the occasional Exxon Valdez
transporting accident, the occasional explosion at a natural gas well and
the fact that we’re going to keep spewing carbon into the atmosphere while
we use our plentiful supplies of oil and natural gas.
No matter how you analyze it, the alternatives are cleaner and safer.
We’ve made little progress in actually using them because we simply have
not had the will to move forward in a way that makes them economically
Nothing we’ve yet tried is perfect and every alternative has drawbacks.
But no alternative has the kinds of drawbacks we now face with our
continued dependence on fossil fuels. The exploration, pumping and
refining of oil is incredibly destructive and inherently dangerous. And
we end up with a product that despoils our air and, too often, our land
and water, too. Not to mention the promise of $5 a gallon gasoline.
The time has arrived for some national leadership that does more than
talk about alternatives. We know the technology exists that can help
move us away from a dependence on oil and gas. We know the alternatives
work and become more efficient the more we develop them.
We’ve talked long enough. Let’s make up our minds what kind of energy
future we’re going to leave our children and then actually do it.
Alternative energy is there for the asking if we can summon up the will.
If, on the other hand, we want to be a fossil fuel country for the
foreseeable future then let’s stop worrying about environmental impact and
dependence on lunatic foreign leaders and quit whining and get busy
fracking and drilling.
What we’re currently doing is a commitment to neither to the detriment of
both. We’re just blowing sunshine and importing fossil fuels.

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5