RSS
There Are Too Many of Us
Some of us may get the "happy ending" you refer to in the panel discussion on solutions for the planet led by Elizabeth Kolbert ("In Search of a Happy Ending," Fall 2007), but our children's children will not. The level of consumption, waste, and growth in this country alone is unsustainable. What's more, there are several billion people who are trying to emulate our selfish, greedy ways. Is everyone afraid to talk about the solution that will alleviate all of the problems mounting against human survival? Here it is: curb population growth. There are simple, inexpensive ways to help people have fewer children. A big step could be taken if a few key leaders would support this position. If we don't set sustainable limits, nature will.
Randy Leiser
Baraboo, Wisconsin
Family Planning
I consistently enjoy your publication and appreciate the work you do. Elizabeth Kolbert's panel discussion in your Fall 2007 issue illustrated the inherent difficulties in identifying solutions to global warming. Some panelists were accused of making the situation seem so complex as to be off-putting to the average consumer (and voter), whereas others would simply advise everyone to buy new energy-saving lightbulbs. But it is a complex matter. There are underlying issues that have a much greater effect than a whole world of lightbulb changes, and these must be addressed. One panelist pointed out that "per capita" energy use in California has remained constant in recent years. But how many more "capitas" will there be in the future, in California and beyond? I hate to think that the religious extremists have succeeded in taking family planning off the table, as it is crucial to the success of efforts such as your own.
Alberta Bouyer
Questa, New Mexico
How Much a Barrel?
Andrew Nikiforuk's article on the development of Alberta's tar sands ("Canada's Highway to Hell," Fall 2007) is spectacular. I had heard about oil sands but had no idea of the criminal waste of resources necessary for extraction. If you include the cost of losing the boreal forests, the investment of human and financial resources, and the price tag on cleanup, a single barrel of oil could end up costing $500. Let's stop this obscenity now.
Peter Cohen
Santa Barbara, California
Shock Therapy
To read "Canada's Highway to Hell" is a profound shock. How can the provincial and national governments -- and the people of the province -- let this go on? Sadly, after the shock wore off, my next thought was, why do I bother with my small part in supporting those organizations that promote environmental awareness, recycling, and other efforts when so many are permitted to be heedlessly irresponsible?
David Pope
Annapolis, Maryland
If Looks Could Kill
I was saddened to open the Fall 2007 issue of OnEarth to find that you had been forced to begin accepting advertisements. One of my favorite things about the magazine was the lack of ads, but I understand the financial pressures that led to the decision. (I, for one, would have been willing to pay more for the magazine to keep it as it was, but not everyone would agree with me on that point.)
I am less forgiving of the changes made to the format, and the direction you seem to have taken in your attempts to appeal to a wider and younger audience. Even more disturbing to me were the vertical, one-line factoids included on the opening pages; choosing what is printworthy based solely on the length of the sentence is not a tactic I ever expected from OnEarth.
You may be aiming at an audience younger than my 28 years, but I don't believe that the best way to attract younger readers is to pander to lowered expectations of journalism, or that such attempts will be successful. I am sure that I can continue to count on your publication for well-written articles and information, and I hope that you are able to find a format that appeals to many generations without lowering the standards that I have come to expect.
Evan Holloway
Portland, Oregon
Share
Mowing the Lawn