We often hear that moving away from fossil fuels will hurt the economy. A recent study by Scripps Oceanography finds that phasing out fossil fuels could save 3.6 million lives per year. This contrasts significantly with this assumption, if we view human lives, health and productivity as part of economic growth. This study concludes that using sustainable energy not only reduces pollution and extreme weather, but greatly benefits human health and “will pay for itself with those savings.” If we value health, fossil fuel emissions can be viewed as detrimental to us, our children, our grandchildren.
The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act (HR 763) recently introduced in the House of Representatives, endorses a fee on carbon to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels with a return of those fees as dividends to households. Ask your representatives to endorse this legislation to save lives and help the economy.
Susan Kobara, Carlsbad
I am writing in support of a monumental bill currently in the California Assembly that would solidify our state as a leader against violence and antiquated animal cruelty practices.
AB 44 would ban the sale of fur in the state of California. Having already passed several key votes in the Assembly, this vote will hopefully soon make it to the state Senate.
Berkeley, Los Angeles and several other large cities in California have already banned the sale of fur. It only makes sense that we should continue this common sense legislation against cruelty.
More than 1 billion rabbits alone are killed each year in the fur trade. Other victims include minks, foxes, coyotes, and even dogs and cats, whose fur imported from China is often mislabeled.
Animals used for fur are kept inside in small cages their entire lives or are violently trapped in the wild. They die by anal or genital electrocution, by being gassed or suffocated to death, or bludgeoning.
The chemicals used to treat fur are dangerous for our water and land, causing the industry to consistently be ranked among the most damaging to the environment by the World Bank.
There is no logical reason or need to continue this industry. With thousands of alternative materials, we need it neither for warmth or fashion.
I encourage anyone reading this to write your Assembly members and Senators and tell them to vote yes on AB-44.
Jamie Robinson, San Diegov