Dear Editor:
I must admit I’m confused by Geraldine Walsh’s Letter to the Editor (Climate Campaign Oct 10). Specifically with the math. How can “(municipal election candidates) work hard toward reducing local energy costs” when at the same time you advocate for the most expensive power generation systems namely “wind (and) solar”? How do municipal politicians decide the outcome of energy policy which is clearly a Provincial jurisdiction? The Green Energy Act shows our local powerlessness.
Where do the financial resources come from to pay for ‘climate change infrastructure’ improvements when we don’t have the money to pay for remedial infrastructure projects already needed in our communities? “We have 104 bridges, 34 are critical and 8 of them are closed” Joanne Ross-Zuj (ibid., Pg1 Center Wellington Candidates Meeting…)
Lastly, the reasoning for this massive increase in expenditure, the worsening of extreme weather, is nothing but a fearmongering fantasy. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Extremes (IPCC-SREX) shows no increase in any of Ms. Walsh’s weather extreme concerns. This information is readily available on the internet.
While Ms. Walsh may dream of a politically ‘wonderful vision of saving the planet in an enlightened age’ I know the only thing that will become “enlightened” is taxpayers wallets.
Jeff Cormack