While I agree completely with the sentiments of John Scott in his letter ("Barbara Boxer's lobbying disappoints," May 8), he can't quite bring himself to say what must be said about the real reason that the proposed Poseidon desalination project must be opposed.
Yes, the project would degrade our coastal environment. Yes, the project would be massively energy-intensive. Yes, the project refuses to use best available technology. Yes, the project would create a host of on-land negative impacts.
Yes, the project would never pencil out as far as water costs go. Yes, the water ratepayers of the Orange County Water District would be left high and dry with a decades long contract they don't want or need. Yes, the Poseidon project would be a huge boondoggle that would never live up to its promises.
Former U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) has either been cynically co-opted or just doesn't see Poseidon's machinations, a la the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain. That is a sad state of affairs for all of us, myself included, who voted for Boxer time and again.
The public must become better informed about what is going on with this project. It will affect us all, especially in the pocketbook. We should not put up with out-of-area lobbyists with their own agendas. We should not allow ourselves to be flim-flammed by special interests that do not represent the best interests of the public. Southern California residents were fooled by Poseidon's Carlsbad desalination facility. I hope we won't be fooled again.
Column fairly portrayed Islam
I would like to thank David Hansen for his positive portrayal of Islam and of Muslims in his column ("Being Muslim behind the Orange Curtain," May 11). I only wish there were more people like him who take the time to investigate and honestly report their findings while basing their opinions on their own observations and not on the words of others.
San Luis Obispo
Column overlooked Islam’s flaws
All this misleading talk that Islam is a peaceful religion is just plain wrong. The media and our politicians refuse to pick up a Koran and confront Muslim spokespeople. Why can't we have a real dialogue?
Trump may as well rename the EPA
On May 9, CNN contributor John Sutter wrote a column titled, "The EPA isn't focused on environmental protection. So, does it need a new name?" At the same time his piece was published, the agency informed 12 of its 18 science advisory board members their services no longer were needed.
It is believed they will be replaced with people who, like President Trump, feel the EPA must eliminate scores of regulations that "do more harm than good." If this is true, then I'd say the EPA is dangerously close to being renamed the Environmental Pollution Agency.