Skip to content

LETTER: Argument that dealing with climate change is too expensive is archaic

Dear editor,
8945112_web1_40-Letter-to-the-editor

Dear editor,

It warms my heart and makes me feel much better about the world my grandchildren will inherit when I read comments like Alyssa Taburiaux’s letter (Fletcher column insulting to millennial) demanding that Black Press editorials reflect a much higher standard of credibility than the anti-science, big-money-interests-are-all-that-matter advocacy of featured columnist Tom Fletcher.

Looking at the news today, it is clear that millennials are very justified in worrying about the future we are leaving to them.

But it is not just millennials who are concerned.

As a grandfather I am deeply concerned that the near constant promotion of big oil propagandist rants like Tom Fletcher’s in defiance of the science of climate change can/will have the same dampening down effect on our actions to save our planet that the clever lies and deceptions of ‘Big Tobacco’ had on our public resolution to deal effectively with the deadly consequences of smoking.

But with climate change the consequences are much greater—especially, as Alyssa’s suggests, when we are trading the future of our children and grandchildren for the short-term profits of oil companies.

Even for Fletcher’s audience, it must now be obvious that the old argument that it is too expensive to deal with climate change is, just plain, dead in the water. When you look at the devastation caused by having 15 of the past 16 years being the hottest on record, it is abundantly clear that we simply cannot afford to not deal with climate change as a number one priority.

Us grandparents, Alyssa’s millennials, our children and grandchildren desperately need a press that will bring us more than ill-informed propaganda-styled balderdash.

Norm Reynolds

Courtenay