Topic: air pollution
You are viewing the most recent posts on this topic.
July 30, 2013 at 6:52 AM
Give trees a chance
It will take about two weeks to pump the amount of carbon-dioxide equivalent to three hours of coal-power emission into a basalt formation. [“A fix for global warming under our feet?”, page one, July 27.]
Can anyone tell me how many acres of trees we could plant in that time instead? Trees have the obvious benefits of emitting oxygen, while providing beauty, habitat, biodiversity, shade, and water purification. The carbon dioxide drifts to them without human help.
That would be too complicated, I guess.
Ellen Peterson, Seattle
July 9, 2013 at 7:30 PM
Pollution should be main focus of debate
With all the talk of long waits at crossings and jobs that will be produced with coal terminals, I find it amazing that no one addresses the elephant in the room. [“Coal, jobs and climate change the debate,” Business, July 7.]
By shipping tons of coal to China so it can be burned in power plants, which have little or no pollution-prevention devices, has it occurred to anyone that, like the aquatic debris from Japan, all that pollution will drift to the West Coast?
Let us not get all tangled up with trains, jobs and such when the real question should be, how many tons of coal pollution is Seattle and the rest of the West Coast ready to breathe?
Wally Adams, Seattle
Trending with readers