Readers offer more fuel for climate-change debate
I'd like to thank Eugene Robinson for highlighting Alaska's achievements on climate change ["Palin's own 'Climate- gate,' " op-ed, Dec. 15] and for noting that I've "treated the issue as serious, complex, and worthy of urgent attention," while making "any number of pragmatic, reasonable, smart decisions as governor." But he's wrong to suggest that my views have somehow changed or that now I'll have to "renounce" my past efforts.
Once again: I don't deny that climate change is real. In creating a sub-cabinet to deal specifically with the issue, I said that "Alaska's climate change strategy must be built on sound science and the best available facts and must recognize Alaska's interest in economic growth and the development of its resources." That goal made sense to me then, and it makes sense to me now.
Mr. Robinson tries to make hay out of the fact that I asked the group to advise me regarding opportunities to participate in "carbon-trading markets." But considering voluntary participation in carbon-trading programs is much different from endorsing the economically disastrous cap-and-tax proposals put forward by Democrats in Washington. Those proposals will burden our job creators and raise energy prices for all of us, and that's why I oppose them.
As governor of Alaska, I sought common-sense solutions that took real-world costs and benefits into account. That's what I'm looking for now. But that's not what's on the table in Washington or in Copenhagen.
Sarah Palin, Wasilla, Alaska
The writer, governor of Alaska from 2006 to 2009, was the 2008 Republican nominee for vice president.
As the nations of the world struggle in Copenhagen this week to corral climate change, it was stunning to see The Post's front-page article on the Gaylord Hotel's ice exhibit, with no hint at the ironies of this energy and carbon-intensive display ["Icily, the ultimate block party," Dec. 15]. So I thought readers might want to know the climate impact of making all that ice.