Letters To The Editor

Editor, Times-Dispatch: I appreciate the news story, "You Can Save Money or You Can Save the Planet," about the Surry coal power plant as an attempt to frame the issue for the public. However, the article falls short of accurately explaining the debate because it fails to fully report the potential for cost-effective energy efficiency to meet our energy needs. The American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) reported in September 2008 that Virginia can meet at least 19 percent, if not more, of its 2025 electricity needs through cost-effective energy efficiency (meaning that it costs less to save electricity than it does to generate electricity). As reported in the ACEEE Virginia report, the cheapest means of providing electricity (three to four cents per kilowatt hour) is to save otherwise wasted electricity through efficiency measures.

The article did not inform readers of this fact and misleadingly framed the controversy as an either/or choice between paying more for electricity to protect the environment and human health or having lower electricity bills at the expense of the planet and our own well-being. Cost-effective energy efficiency measures lower consumer costs while improving air and water quality and abating the advance of climate change. According to the ACEEE report, if Virginia chose to pursue the 19 percent energy efficiency goal, consumers would save $15 billion by 2025. Additionally, pursuing an energy efficient future would create over 9,000 new jobs by 2025. These economic benefits do not even include the savings from averted pollution-related health care costs and lost productivity. Clearly this is a choice in the best interests of our economy and our environment. Bill Greenleaf. Richmond. Editor, Times-Dispatch: In reference to the issue of sexting: Parents are delusional if they think that they do not have to confront these issues head-on with their kids before disaster strikes. It is just another kind of stranger danger. Kids do not know what is going to appear in the messages that their friends send them until after the message is opened.

For those who think that it is largely a suburban problem or is associated with certain socio-economic groups, they are nuts. It's everywhere. These are probably the same people who think their kids are not drinking or having sex because it is two o'clock in the afternoon.

Additionally, it is happening at a young age. I have a friend whose 12-year-old daughter was the unwitting victim of sexting in another state. She rebuffed the amorous advances of another young girl at school. Out of rejection, the spurned young lady illicitly snapped photos of my friend's daughter while in the locker room. They were then sent to dozens of other children in other schools as well as her own.

Sadly, even the law does not deal with this because the perpetrator either gets labeled as a sex offender or gets away without any legal reprimand. Heather J. Nees. Chesterfield. Editor, Times-Dispatch: In response to Jean Morris' letter, "Torture Critic Volunteers to Waterboard Cheney": She volunteers to waterboard an American who has sworn an oath to protect the United States -- but not a terrorist who has sworn an oath to destroy us. How ironic.

Where was she on Sept. 11, 2001? Did she not see the airplanes fly into the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon, and crash into a field in Pennsylvania? Doesn't she think that the people in those burning buildings and on those airplanes went through some sort of torture? What about their families?

This country has not seen another attack in the seven-and-a-half years since then. One reason is because of waterboarding. Would Morris rather see innocent Americans killed than terrorists coerced into revealing their plans to kills us? Lennie Ellzey. Emporia. Editor, Times-Dispatch: It has been informative to listen to both sides of the torture debate. Both make some excellent points. I'd like to cast the discussion in a different context: If given the choice, I wonder how many Americans would opt for a session of waterboarding in lieu of getting laid off.

Those who would consider that must at heart feel that the experience millions are enduring right now in our country is far worse than the experience we are subjecting the world's most heinous villains to. Barry Batista. Mechanicsville. Editor, Times-Dispatch: The stark contrast between our frenzied reaction to unfamiliar hazards and our reckless tolerance of familiar ones never ceases to amaze me.

The current incidence of swine flu, which has killed five Americans, has captured the headlines, cancelled public events, and closed dozens of schools. At the same time, we have blithely continued our consumption of meat and dairy products, which have been linked conclusively with elevated risk of heart disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes, and other chronic diseases that kill 1.3 million Americans annually.

It's just not about chronic diseases. According to the United Nations, animal agriculture is responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse emissions, leading to catastrophic floods, droughts, and sea-level rises -- which threaten human survival. It uses more fresh water and dumps more deadly wastes into our water supplies than all other human activities combined.

Each of us has a shared responsibility for our society's health and welfare. The best time to exercise this responsibility is on our next trip to the supermarket, where we can explore the rich variety of meat-free and dairy-free, ready-to-eat frozen dinners, veggie burgers and hot dogs, lunch "meats" and plant-based cheese, ice cream, and milk. Helpful transition hints and recipes galore are available at http://www.tryveg.org and http://www.chooseveg.org. Elgin Atwater. Richmond.