Opinion

Letter: Colorado Springs must fight for cleaner energy

Author: Colorado Politics - March 8, 2017 - Updated: March 8, 2017

TCS_S_Logo.png
The Colorado StatesmanThe Colorado Statesman

Editor:

An article published February 26 indicated that the city of Pueblo has committed itself to using only clean energy by 2035, just as Aspen achieved in 2015. This is an admirable effort, which the city of Colorado Springs should look to emulate in order to contribute to a more sustainable future.

In 2014, the Colorado Springs City Council turned down the goal to be 30 percent powered by renewable energy by 2020. We currently have around 10.1 percent green energy capacity, and the Council has imposed a 1 percent annual rate cap on further green energy development. As it stands, our own goal is to produce 20 percent of our energy from renewable sources; unfortunately, our own goal is an impossibility if we the citizens don’t fight for cleaner energy. Solar energy is already the most accessible form of power production available to citizens.

Environment Colorado — an organization for which I’m working as an intern — is running Solarize the Springs, a project which aims to make solar installation and electric vehicles accessible to a wider range of Springs citizens. This and similar efforts help ensure the sanctity of our environment and offer monetary incentives to further simplify the transition to cleaner energy. Similar projects have worked wonders in Boulder, where an incentivized electric vehicle purchasing program resulted in a 300 percent increase in the EVs sold at the dealership offering the deal. We are looking to build public support for the project, so please read more about it and sign in to support our movement by using this link. It is time for Colorado Springs to take a greater interest in sustaining our environment, and Solarize the Springs intends to give citizens the power to do just that.

Tristan Bohnen
Colorado Springs, Colo.

Colorado Politics

Colorado Politics

Colorado Politics, formerly The Colorado Statesman, is the state's premier political news publication, renowned for its award-winning journalism. The publication is also the oldest political news outlet in the state, in continuous publication since 1898. Colorado Politics covers the stories behind the stories in Colorado's state Capitol and across the Centennial State, focusing on politics, public policy and elections with in-depth reporting on the people behind the campaigns — from grassroots supporters to campaign managers and the candidates and issues themselves.


2 comments

  • Pete Kuntz

    March 9, 2017 at 5:01 pm

    Re “Colorado Springs must fight for cleaner energy” : It’s great that organizations like Colorado Environment and its Solarize the Springs program exist, but the scientific community is unanimous in saying that we must act much faster and on a global scale if we are to avert “catastrophic” global warming.

    Fortunately, there’s a proven, conservative economic plan that can create a swift transition to clean energy in the U.S. and can serve as a model for other countries as well. It was presented at the White House last month by the Republican party’s most respected economists, including Greg Manikw and three former GOP Treasury Secretaries—James Baker, George Schultz and Henry Paulson— representing the Climate Leadership Council.

    It’s a carbon tax that’s paid TO the taxpayers, rather than by them. Within three years it will cut emissions more than the EPA’s Clean Power Plan ever would, all without government regulations or expenditures, all without any government regulations, expansion or expenditures.

    Every fossil fuel corporation pays the tax and 100% of it goes to every taxpayer in a quarterly carbon “dividend” check. The tax steadily increases and so do people’s “dividends.” Use that money to buy cheaper clean and you make a profit.

    That’s projected to increase GDP $75-80 billion annually (REMI) and create over 5 million good-paying, permanent (40-year) clean-energy jobs, according to the Climate Leadership Council’s ally, Stanford University’s solutionsproject.org.

    This revenue-neutral carbon tax has worked as promised in British Columbia for the past eight years, cutting taxes and energy bills, creating jobs and the best economy of any Canadian province (The Economist). It has an 83% public approval rating there (World Bank).

  • Christopher Calder

    March 15, 2018 at 9:11 pm

    Thoughtless people ignore the fact that all our food is made of carbon and is produced, transported, and refrigerated with energy from fossil fuels. A tax on carbon is a direct tax on food production, which means more hunger and a higher cost of living. The correct way to get cheaper, cleaner energy is to ban all biofuel production, which is eroding our topsoil, increasing air and water pollution, killing off our friends the bees, and keeping food prices artificially high. By reducing the cost of food we can reduce food stamp use and thus lower budget deficits.

    We should end all mandates and subsidies for incurably inefficient and unreliable wind and solar projects and put just 20% of the money saved into research to find a true replacement for fossil fuels. It is mathematically provable that the only replacement possible is some form of safe nuclear power, which has the highest energy density of all sources and is capable of operating reliably 24-7-365, not just when the wind blows and the sun shines. The most promising hope is simplified hot fusion technology that does not use expensive lasers, as does the government funded International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project, which is a costly boondoggle. A number of private companies, including aerospace giant Lockheed Martin, have low cost compact fusion designs they think they can get to work at reasonable cost.

    All life is carbon based. A hysterical war on carbon is a war against living. Please read *The Renewable Energy Disaster* website at http://renewable.50webs.com/

Comments are closed.