Letters to the Editor
Nuclear upgrades not automatic A Nov. 29 article, "Squeezing the atom," said that regardless of legislative actions, Exelon will move forward with nuclear power plant upgrades, or uprates, "because it makes economic sense." Although we are pursuing an ambitious upra
A Nov. 29 article, "Squeezing the atom," said that regardless of legislative actions, Exelon will move forward with nuclear power plant upgrades, or uprates, "because it makes economic sense." Although we are pursuing an ambitious uprate program involving 19 separate projects, each project is subject to rigorous analysis that considers all economic and legislative factors before we commit to its completion. As such, it is not true that Exelon will complete these power uprates regardless of legislative actions.
Notably, current versions of House Bill 80 not only exclude nuclear energy as a qualifying resource, but also would increase the mandated purchase of more costly renewable energy by consumers from 18 percent to 31 percent. In an industry where a single percentage-point decrease in market share is very significant, a law that effectively eliminates 31 percent of the market creates a powerful disincentive for increasing nuclear power output or any other resource that does not qualify under the legislation.
Senior vice president
Give casino backers
a lump of coal
I am amazed at the number of backroom deals and breaks that the Foxwoods Casino continues to receive. The amount of underhandedness must be astounding. I hope the members of the Pennsylvania gaming commission do not grant them yet another unfair break with an additional extension of time.
If the commission does the honorable thing and makes Foxwoods comply with the completion dates that all the other casinos have been able to meet, then this terrible project will thankfully and appropriately be doomed. Perhaps Santa can help: Dear Santa, please bring all the bad boys and girls who have been pushing this corrupt process and this evil empire a lump of coal for Christmas. It'll be a merrier Christmas without Foxwoods.
Michael J. Toklish
Dredging will spoil
Re: "Dredging opponents have ulterior motives," letter, Wednesday:
The notion that the Delaware Riverkeeper and those in southern New Jersey opposing the dredging are motivated by prejudice against South Jersey is patently ludicrous. Dredging will bring severe environmental damage to the Delaware and to South Jersey, and especially to the sensitive ecological areas along the river and its tributaries.
Remember the Mississippi Delta, New Orleans, and the Florida Everglades. The Delaware Bay could be next on the damage list if the Army Corps of Engineers has its way. Stop the delusion now and help protect South Jersey.
What's the harm
If New Jersey is opposed to dredging, why is the state proposing a port in Paulsboro that will require dredging? Why is it not fighting the dredging of the Hudson?
If environmentalists think dredging is harmful to the environment, why do they not oppose the Baltimore dredging spoils being used to reconstitute an island with a wetlands area and a bird sanctuary in the middle of the Chesapeake Bay?
Philip J. Donohue
An editorial Tuesday, "Paying for college," took a bold stand for students by supporting legislation that would end wasteful subsidies to private student-loan companies and invest $87 billion toward making college more affordable and accessible for the average American.
What you did not mention is that Sen. Bob Casey (D., Pa.) is under heavy fire from a multimillion-dollar lobbying and public-relations campaign by the student-loan industry to persuade him to support the current practice of government handouts to banks.
In 2006, I took a stand and supported Casey. I can only hope that he will now take a stand for students like me by following The Inquirer's example and supporting this crucial investment in the future of our country.
hurt the dying
Re: "Medical marijuana gets Pa. House hearing," Thursday:
Your article said the American Medical Association "advocates more federal research into the development of a smoke-free, inhaled 'delivery system' to reduce the health hazards associated with inhaling marijuana smoke."
For people who have terminal diseases? Am I missing some logic here?
of eminent domain
I would like to thank you for keeping eminent domain abuse on the front burner ("Legal land grabs," Nov. 25). I found it interesting, but not surprising, that eminent domain reform remained a moot issue in this year's New Jersey gubernatorial election. Let me explain to your readers why that is.
Our state has been run by the League of Municipalities for ages, and it wants to maintain the ability to take people's homes when opportunity comes knocking. None of the candidates could risk losing the league's support.
Richard G. Gober