Unfettered Letters

Driving to conserve?

Drive like a pro: Slow down

Get out of the Kansas City area and you see what the professionals are doing. I’m talking about the truck drivers.

I recently drove out to western Nebraska, and for most of the trip the posted speed limit was 75. Yet at 72 I was passing far more truckers than were passing me. Not that long ago, I would have been sitting still compared to their speed.

In an industry where prompt delivery is essential, saving fuel trumps speed. Kansas City area drivers who drive their 20 miles from the suburbs to downtown at 70 rather than 60 waste fuel, lower our collective road safety and get to work about three minutes faster.

If you want to get to work on time, leave the house on time. Ease off the gas pedal like the professionals.

Philip Humphrey
Blue Springs

Don’t dare bring back 55 mph

This is an open letter to all my elected representatives, be they city, county, state or federal and anyone hoping to represent me after the next election. If any of the aforementioned people express an interest in bringing back the hideously flawed 55 mph speed limit, they will immediately be scratched from the list of people I might consider voting for, and their names will be added to my other list.

Thank you for your kind attention.

Larry Martin
Kansas City

Reducing the number of drivers

To immediately reduce U.S. consumption of foreign oil, we need to reduce the number of automobile drivers. This can easily be accomplished by requiring a high school graduation diploma to get a driver’s license.

My proposal would raise the age to get a driver’s license to 18. It would eliminate the high school dropout problem. It would get the least experienced drivers off of the road, making the roads safer. It would save school districts the expense of building parking lots for students, thus providing more money for education without raising taxes. It would substantially reduce a student’s parents’ debt for the student’s car, insurance and gas.

My proposal would be environmentally friendly, because it would reduce the number of cars on the road.

My proposal would also make it harder for foreign terrorists to get a driver’s license.

Ted Baker
Overland Park

U.S. should fund ‘green’ science

The July issue of Vanity Fair magazine has an article about the birth of what we today know as the Internet, including the very basic evolvement of the digital age.

What is notable about the early stages of this development is the huge investment made by the federal government. Without the millions of early dollars in support of the most basic research, the rapid and widespread advance of the incipient technology would possibly not have occurred.

The funding of this basic science made it possible for the U.S. to lead the rest of the world and to become the dominant force in the burst of technology.

One has to wonder if the same creativity and progress would not occur if the federal government would fund the so-far widely spread out efforts at the very basic level in the field of alternative energy and other “green” science.

Until there is a concerted effort, with the money it will take to make significant strides in this most crucial technology, the U.S. is wasting time and effort.

Steve Sherry
Kansas City

Ten ways to use less oil

To reduce our dependence on foreign oil:

1. Return the speed limit to 55 mph.
2. Increase state and federal gasoline taxes by 1 cent per gallon per month.
3. Establish a benchmark mpg standard for cars, say 30 mpg. Increase it gradually. For each mpg over the benchmark the buyer gets a federal tax refund of $500 when purchasing such a car, not to exceed 50 percent of the car’s price. For each mpg under the benchmark the buyer pays a $500 gas-guzzler tax.
4. Lower state sales tax and licensing fees on cars that get more than 30 mpg.
5. All future federal, state and city cars must be get more than 40 mpg.
6. All pumps must have a sign on every grade of gasoline telling the percentage of ethanol in it.
7. Allow only disabled drivers to use drive-through windows.
8. Use any extra revenue from the state, federal or gas-guzzler taxes to subsidize wind power, solar power and mass transit.
9. Raise the minimum driving age by three months each year until we import no more oil or the minimum age hits 21.
10. Encourage employees to walk to work or to carpool.

Patrick H. Crowe
Kansas City

Electric cars will help Earth

I was pleased to read The Star’s support for all-electric cars (6/30, Opinion, “All-electric vehicles hold great promise”) and the concerns expressed by Scott Bielicki (7/2, Letters, “Electric cars aren’t the answer”). However, each of Mr. Bielicki’s concerns have been addressed and resolved:

Oil refineries are the single biggest user placing demands on the electrical grid in our nation.

The actual carbon footprint of an electric vehicle, measured from the point of creating electricity to the point of driving down the road, is less than the footprint of pulling oil out of the Earth, transporting it to and from a refinery, refining it and driving down the road.

Which is easier to clean: the exhaust from one smokestack (assuming you use coal to generate electricity) or the exhaust pipe from up to a million internal combustion vehicles?

Electric vehicles are not designed to be the single answer to America’s transportation needs or air-quality problems. However, electric cars are a very real, affordable, reliable and available option to help ease our oil addiction and clean our air.

Jim Donovan
Member, Mid America Electric Vehicle Association
Westwood

Oil and coal won’t last forever

We concern ourselves with loss of habitat — rain forests, wetlands, river pollution — even though these trends may be reversible. But expenditure of petroleum and coal falls into the irreversible category. When they are gone, they are gone.

The answer is not to discover and pump more oil or mine more coal to be used as fuel from the finite supply produced in nature over eons. Nor is the long-run answer atomic energy, for the availability of radioactive elements usable as “atomic” fuel is also finite.

The answer to our need for energy in the form of fuel must be in renewable sources — solar, wind, organic, hydrothermal, wave (which are largely solar energy stored in different configurations).

Petroleum and coal are not recyclable, like metals, nor can they economically synthesized as the chemical base for numerous products, much less as fuel.

We cannot presume that practical sources of unlimited energy, such as atomic fusion, will become available before we expend all our oil, coal and uranium — if ever.

Our legacy to the future must be that we recognized the finite aspects of natural resources and ceased their profligate dissipation.

Harvey A. Jetmore Jr.
Roeland Park

Oil exploration

There’s no oil on Mars

It would seem to me that if this government can fund a program that successfully launched and landed a probe on Mars, a trip of some 422 million miles (5/26, A-2, “NASA scores touchdown; Sunday’s arrival is the first successful soft landing on Mars since 1976”), we can solve our energy crisis.

It was no small task, safely delivering the Phoenix spacecraft to a distant world, setting it down accurately and having it operate successfully. By redirecting these brilliant minds, perhaps funded with the billions being squandered in Iraq, we should be able to drastically reduce our consumption of oil by developing new alternatives.

Mars and the rest of the cosmos will always be there for future exploration. However, if we continue on our current path, we may not be.

M.A. Northcraft
Lee’s Summit

We must use oil responsibly

Mike Sienicki’s assertion that “Oil is the engine of freedom” (6/30, Letters) is disturbing because it reflects a very shallow understanding of liberty.

Such a watered-down concept of freedom demeans the sacrifices made to establish and preserve meaningful freedoms in this country, such as freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, the freedom to practice or not to practice a religion, and the rights to due process and to equal protection under the law, just to name a few.

It’s difficult to imagine that the American Revolution was fought so that we could hunt pheasant in Kansas or fish in the Gulf.

I do agree that we have a right to pursue happiness, but that right entails responsibilities to others, including future generations.

The attitude that “It makes sense to use what oil is accessible to you” suggests a degree of selfishness that, if universalized, would destroy our ability to pursue happiness.

Pablo La Rosa
Mission

Greed caused energy crisis

Oil prices and U.S. automakers woes are making headlines. These are problems that we civilians have seen coming for many years.

Why did the automakers just this year publicly recognize that people could not afford to drive the gas guzzlers they were producing? Did they really think oil prices would ever go down again? And obviously the politicians were receiving so much oil company money they had to ignore the obvious: that this country has to develop alternative fuels for transportation.

These were two very preventable crises causes by greed.

Steve Alexander
Raytown

We must conserve resources

Yes, go ahead and drill in our costal waters and Alaska.

Yes, we (who are alive now) can use all the coal, oil, water and gas, which are all finite. What about long-term use? These short-term fixes are just that: short term. We must have a huge change of mindset to start conserving our resources.

A recent trip to Denver going 60 mph saved us half a tank of gas over our usual 70 mph.

Bruce Rogers
Kansas City

Restaurants should recycle

One way that Kansas City can become “greener” is to make it mandatory for all restaurants and bars to recycle the cans and bottles that they now dump. The servers would toss the items into bins specific for each category, eliminating secondary sorting at recycling centers. Reducing this waste will slow the need for new landfills.

Kansas City has made the air cleaner to breathe with its smoke-free policy. Now let’s work on the land.

Randy Maddox
Kansas City

Electric cars aren’t the answer

The Star’s unqualified support for electric vehicles (6/30, Opinion, “All-electric vehicles hold great promise”) reminds me of the recent ethanol bandwagon.

You do not discuss the fact that switching from gasoline to electric vehicles will require a massive increase in electricity production, production you have fought in the recent past.

Furthermore, you do not discuss the carbon footprint of the increased electricity production. While the electricity leaving the car’s battery is emission-free, the means of producing that electricity most often is not. How does that carbon output compare with gasoline or diesel? How much coal is being burned to travel 100 miles?

Who is going to pay for the massive new power generation necessary? Shouldn’t those costs be included in the $27,000 retail price of the electric car? What about the cost of replacement batteries? The cost of disposal of the dead batteries? How about the lost gas tax that won’t be available to fund highway repair? Where is that money going to come from?

Electric cars are shortsighted solution.

Scott Bielicki
Overland Park

Be patriotic and slow down

Let’s get prudent and patriotic. If we slow down to stay under 2,000 rpm or drive five miles per gallon under speed limits in town or no more than 60 on the highway, we can significantly reduce demand and cost until we get oil independent — and perhaps reduce our chances of another 9/11. We can do it!

Plug-in hybrids are around the corner, and they are a lot more energy-efficient than cars that burn biofuels.

Chris Mahley
Fairway

Immigration and energy use

Your editorial, “Offshore drilling is no panacea for U.S.” (6/19, Opinion) and E. Thomas McClanahan’s column (6/22, Opinion, “Drop the barriers and explore our options”) offer some good options for dealing with our energy crisis but completely miss an obvious step to reduce short- and long-term demand for gasoline. That important step is to stabilize our U.S. population, which can largely be achieved by ending immigration.

Each year the United States admits more than one million legal immigrants. Several hundred thousand of these new residents promptly become motorists, increasing demand for our limited supply of motor fuels. This demand pressure assures that prices will definitely not go down and will most likely continue to rise.

Conservation is a hollow and futile gesture when misguided national policy is deliberately offsetting our individual efforts.

Let’s stabilize our population, reduce demand and move toward a more secure energy future.

Wayne Byrd
Overland Park

Recreation in the oilfields

It appears that those who oppose drilling offshore or in Alaska are oblivious to reality (a requirement for being a liberal).

Oil is the engine of freedom, which also explains why liberals are against its mining and use. If you don’t believe it, move to a country where little is used, such as Cuba. It makes sense to use what oil is accessible to you, insulating you from political winds.

As an avid hunter and fisherman, I love the outdoors and a clean environment. However, without oil, I can’t access most of my favorite areas. My best day of quail hunting has been in the middle of a Texas oilfield. I’ve successfully hunted pheasant in western Kansas oilfields and have caught many fish while tied to oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico.

A clean environment and oil drilling are not mutually exclusive. For those who think they are, please do what you expect us to do: Go without! Take a bike or horse to work. Don’t use oil products to heat your home. Also, don’t use any products made with or transported by petroleum products.

Lead by example. Your actions may lessen our dependence on foreign oil.

Mike Sienicki
Farley, Mo.

Time for ‘smart’ traffic signals

Why can’t metropolitan Kansas City take the lead in energy conservation by doing something more than changing to compact fluorescent light bulbs?

Would not a complete network of “smart” traffic signals put Kansas City at the front? There are already computerized systems on stretches of the busiest streets. Just drive down Metcalf and, if your speed is right, you can miss most of the stoplights. Also, the interstates have the Kansas City Scout, a network of cameras and message boards, to keep traffic moving.

However, most traffic signals use outdated technology and activate retroactively. As a vehicle approaches a vacant intersection with a red light, a sensor detects the vehicle and initiates a timer to change the light to green. Meanwhile, the vehicle comes to a complete stop and the driver waits for the light to change.

A far better system would sense the approaching vehicle halfway down the block, well in advance of the intersection, and change the light to green before the vehicle needs to slow down. If more than one vehicle approaches, the system would decide the most efficient flow pattern considering undue delays in the cross direction.

This would save gas, time, tires, brakes and annoyance.

Joseph Landwehr
Kansas City

Wasting time and gasoline

I’m in total agreement with Bob Patterson (6/11, Letters), who is frustrated by stopping at traffic lights when there is no opposing traffic. Living in Pleasant Hill and driving west to Overland Park across Highway 150, I can think of at least three “dumb” stoplights. That’s before getting to the Kansas state line.

Drive-through windows are also a complete waste of fuel and time. Admittedly, there are times that I use a drive-through before a business opens its doors. However, when you pass a fast-food restaurant with a line of cars waiting to order, the gas consumed idling is mind-boggling.

Folks waiting in drive-throughs could probably reduce the size of their gas bill and their waistlines by walking a few yards to order that burger.

Mitch Hanna
Pleasant Hill

Higher taxes would save gas

I just about fell off my chair reading The Star’s Opinion page on 6/10. I found myself agreeing with Charles Krauthammer for the first time ever (“Want fuel efficiency? Put more taxes on gas”). Who would have thought that he believes in the power of taxes to alter undesirable behavior where free markets fail to work sufficiently?

Even though it is politically incorrect to say so, U.S. gasoline prices have indeed been too low for many years, thereby contributing to our energy dependence and skyrocketing demand for oil.

Having grown up in Europe, I’ve witnessed firsthand how prohibitive gas taxes over time lead to conservation and alternative transportation, much better than any complicated schemes of efficiency standards and subsidies could ever achieve. This is why per capita energy consumption in, say, Germany, is about half that of the United States.

We have a long way to go, but only high gas prices will get us started in the right direction.

Sine Thieme
Overland Park

Charles Krauthammer hit the nail on the head. Finally someone has come up with the real reason why gas prices are so high and why our auto industry has been dragging its collective feet in producing more fuel-efficient cars.

I suggest that the taxes on gasoline at the pump be indexed to the price of oil in the global market. Ten cents a gallon for every 10 dollars it costs to buy a barrel of oil would provide just the right incentive for change.

I note that Congress also recently failed to pass higher taxes on oil company profits. I agree with this action because that is not where the incentive for fuel economy should be placed.

W.C. Klemm Sr.
Olathe

Rain barrels are mosquito-proof

Tom McGuire (6/5, Letters, “Seeing red over ‘green’.”) worries that rain barrels are a breeding ground for mosquitoes.

After collecting rain in the barrels, a tight-fitting lid is put on to keep out mosquitoes. If rain is collected in other containers, rather than a rain barrel, lids are also put on them to prevent mosquito problems.

Often a screen is put over the opening of a rain barrel to prevent debris from getting into the water and then a tight lid is placed on the barrel. The water can then be taken out of the barrel with a ladle, or a spigot for a hose can be attached to the lower part of the barrel so you can water your garden or lawn.

I collect rain water in plastic containers and transfer the water to bottles with a tight lid, so there is no chance of my water becoming a breeding ground for mosquitoes. I wish I had a rain barrel, but I don’t, so I do my best at keeping our earth green.

Nancy Kwak
Independence

Time worth more than gas

Here we go again. Drive slower to save gas. That works if you don’t have to make a living selling merchandise that requires you to call on customers. The last time this country’s speed limit was 55 mph, it required me to increase the length of my workday by 30 percent.

Think of this: Following the letter (6/9) on this subject: It took the writer about 5 61/27 hours to drive 360 miles at 65 mph. I would have gone 75 mph, arriving about 45 minutes earlier. In that 45 minutes I could have made one business call, which normally resulted in my getting $75 to $100 in commissions from my sale.

The writer had to purchase 12.8 gallons of gas, and I would have burned 16.3 gallons of gas. At $4 per gallon, it would have cost me $14 more.

If you are retired, I guess it doesn’t matter, but if you are trying to pay the bills, I would take the quickest trip.

John Proctor
Stilwell

Politicans’ heavy use of fuel

Billy Burke (6/6, Letters) is worried about how much money President Bush wasted by attending a fundraiser in Kansas and traveling on Air Force One. I wonder if Billy also worried about Clinton when he was doing the same thing. Plus the fact Clinton sat on the runway of a large airport, with the engines running, while he received a $200 haircut.

Not to mention the fact that his wife, Hillary, traveled all over the world at the taxpayers’ expense.

It’s all in the eyes of the beholder, Billy.

It’s also part of a president’s job. So get over it.

Bill Austin
Kansas City

I have just about had enough of the politicians telling us to conserve.

When Ted Kennedy goes home from the hospital, he gets into an SUV. The candidates for our president are shown getting off private jets. Couldn’t they fly the commercial airlines or take Amtrak? Aren’t the buses still running?

I don’t believe they practice what they preach.

Jim Schmitt
Liberty

Save gas by driving 65 mph

I read in The Star that some drivers are reducing speed to 55 mph to save gasoline (6/1, A-1, “With gas at $4, a few strive for 55”). It is not very likely that a significant number of drivers will do that after so many years of driving at 70 to 75 mph.

First, it is just not a realistic expectation for drivers to reduce speed that much. Second, it could be a bit of a hazard to do so on the interstates with so many large trucks and cars traveling at high speed. A more realistic speed reduction would be to 65 mph.

I recently made a drive of 360 miles, mostly on interstates, in a 2007 Buick Lucerne. I set the cruise control at 65 mph and varied only to slow down if needed. Many cars passed me. I passed a very few, and some even stayed behind me.

The important thing was that my car made 28 mpg at 65 mph compared with 22 mpg made many times on the same trip at 75 mph. That is a significant saving at a more realistic speed.

Eli Boucher
Olathe

Energy crisis a job for world

Our politicians’ arrogance and lack of forethought is costing our auto industry, its workers and our economy dearly.

In 2003, Missouri Senator Kit Bond opposed higher fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks, on the grounds that our U.S. auto manufacturers would suffer and be forced to lay off workers. In a previous fight against higher fuel efficiency standards, then-Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi balked at the idea that Americans would have to drive small cars.

Both senators have repeatedly opposed ending subsidies to oil companies, because, as Sen. Bond said in 2005, oil companies faced “an impossible jungle” of regulations.

Oil companies and their congressional cronies are now arguing that taxpayer subsidies are necessary to research alternative fuels. Are we naïve enough to think that oil companies have an interest in researching alternative fuels, considering the mega profits they are currently reaping?

Solutions to our crisis lie not in subsidizing a multimillion dollar polluting industry, or disfiguring our lands drilling for carbons, but in joining other pioneering countries with considerable investments in efficient transportation and clean renewable energy sources, which will regenerate our sliding economy and world standing while preserving our planet.

John Preudhomme
Blue Springs

Let’s fix problems ourselves

Everyone seems so concerned about the economy these days. Let’s blame the president and elect someone with hope and change to solve the problems. We need a government to make our decisions for us?

Surely the way we Americans live and the decisions we make have nothing to do with our economy. We the people can’t be driving up health care and fuel prices. But the fact is that smoking and obesity cause higher health-care costs.

Another fact is that going 10 to 15 mph over the speed limit, not car pooling and not using public transportation increase fuel cost. Supply and demand.

There is a lot more that we the people can do than blame government for all our ills.

Next time you pass someone as you’re going 10 to 15 miles over the speed limit while smoking and eating those fries, think about what you’re doing to help.

As not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for it — haven’t heard that in a while.

Thomas L. Hay
Lake Waukomis

Drive-throughs waste gas

There have been many articles and letters on reducing speeds to save gas. In all this talk about conserving gas while driving, not mentioned is a rather obvious means of achieving that goal: Cutting down on the use of drive-through windows at fast food facilities and banks would not only minimize pollution from cars idling but encourage walking from the parking lot to the place of business.

I find from my own experience that often the time used in entering the business is less than sitting in a line of cars waiting to be served. Those who are disabled and truly need the service would also benefit by having shorter wait times.

H.M. Brown
Westwood Hills

Earth to Jonah Goldberg

Jonah Goldberg (5/22, Opinion, “Ritual over reality mars environmental cause”) implies that environmentalists advocate the use of paper bags over plastic bags at grocery stores. Environmentalists as well as conservationists actually promote the use of neither. The preferred method is for shoppers to take their own bags to the store and reuse them — hardly a radical concept.

Mr. Goldberg also implies that environmentalists support corn ethanol. This is not true. Environmentalists and conservationists view corn ethanol as damaging to the environment and anti-conservation as it requires a great deal of water, energy and pesticides to produce and refine for little or no energy gain over oil. What these groups promote is conservation and renewable energy such as wind and solar, while some support the use of nuclear energy.

Mr. Goldberg notes the link between economic conservatism and environmental conservation. Thankfully, many who favor economic conservatism are applying these same fundamental concepts toward the conservation of our environment.

John Dubois
Prairie Village

When Jonah Goldberg wrote that environmentalism was based on Judeo-Christian beliefs, I was sure he was getting ready to praise it. Guess not.

I have never come across a columnist whose head was screwed on so badly since James J. Kilpatrick retired.

Robert B. O’Rourke
Leavenworth

Time to ration gasoline?

Karen Conklin (5/19, Letters) proposes raising the gas tax to “cut down on consumption.” Lower income people are the ones who would be hurt the most.

We have to drive our cars because suburbia does not have public transportation. We must drive to doctor appointments, grocery stores and church. Walking or bike riding is out of the question for many older citizens, and distances are prohibitive.

If you really want to cut down on the use of gasoline, then Congress should ration it like they did during WWII. This would cut down on usage and would spread the “pain” over all citizens, not just the lower income group.

Jerry Nowak
Lee’s Summit

Slow down, save money

Everyone talks about high gas prices, but nobody does anything about it.

Recently I made two trips from Overland Park to Fort Scott, Kan., and back. For the first I drove with traffic, at more or less the speed limit of 65 to 70 mph, and calculated the miles per gallon as 21.

The next morning I thought, “Hmm … I wonder.” So I drove exactly 60 down and back. Mileage was 25 mpg.

So yes, I am the one out there on I-435 going 60. Thank you for all the salutes and shouts of encouragement.

P.S. For sale: One rearview mirror.

Ron Platt
Overland Park

There is a new way to measure your car’s performance. I drive a relatively small vehicle. On the latest in-town driving I got 6.6 miles to the dollar.

It really makes you realize the cost to drive.

Richard Huff
Overland Park

Some people need SUVs

Chris Lusebrink’s statement (5/18, Letters) that an SUV is not anything someone needs for any reason is far from the truth. I would love to be able to drive a smaller compact car with much better gas mileage than my 16-mpg SUV. However, this is not possible. My daughter would not be able to participate in wheelchair sports.

Our track wheelchair is approximately 4 61/27 to 5 feet long. We must also transport her everyday-use chair when traveling.

I would like to see Chris Lusebrink fit both of these chairs, which do not collapse, as well as luggage and people into a compact car.

Jennifer Von Behren
Belton

Wind energy or hot air?

Wealthy pseudo-environmentalists, busily producing their own trash quota while jetting from coast to coast, get all misty-eyed imagining flyover country paved with wind farms providing them energy. Why are these ill-conceived notions so trendy?

Wind farms are death traps for migrating birds. They’re costly to maintain. They produce noise pollution as constant and debilitating as truck-choked freeways. They look creepy on empty land, like those alien death-machines in War of the Worlds. They’re as big an eyesore as a field of oil derricks and one-tenth as productive.

Clean, available, less obtrusive and cheaper energy alternatives will progress beyond Dutch windmill technology.

Sam Gill
Kansas City

Curtailing rising gas prices

With gas prices headed towards the stratosphere, whining about the oil industries stuffing their pockets with our money and pointing our fingers toward the ever-present scapegoat that is Washington won’t likely result in gas prices going down anytime soon.

If the price of gas is to re-enter Earth’s atmosphere in the near future, we need to stop daydreaming and take action. For one thing, this country’s ridiculous obsession with over-the-top, impractical SUVs needs to stop. A vehicle big enough to go charging through the jungle is not anything someone needs for any reason.

By driving these vehicles with poor gas mileage, some Americans can put some of the blame of high prices on themselves. They waste gas and keep demand high, thus leaving people with cars, such as myself, to keep contributing to Big Oil’s piggy bank.

With all that is going on with the “go green” initiatives, and everybody jumping on the “save the planet” bandwagon these days, why don’t more people put their money where their mouths are?

Chris Lusebrink
Lansing

I recently read an article on CNNMoney.com titled “Slow down a little, save a lot of gas.” Here is a quote from the article.

“In a typical family sedan, every 10 miles per hour you drive over 60 is like the price of gasoline going up about 54 cents per gallon. That figure will be even higher for less fuel-efficient vehicles that go fewer miles on a gallon to start with. … Every 10 mph faster reduces fuel economy by about 4 mpg, a figure that remains fairly constant regardless of vehicle size.”

What a difference we could make in the demand for gasoline if we all slowed down to 60 mph on the highway. We could save millions of gallons every day.

Jim Walsh
Overland Park

Employers: Is it possible to offer your employees four 10-hour days a week to help with their budgets?

I am sure that you expect your employees to help keep your company expenses down. Do you have it in your heart to make adjustments for your staff to save them money on the high cost of gasoline?

Think about it. There may be something that you can do.

Beth Boerger
Kansas City

Reining in environmentalists

Ross Balano (5/10, Opinion, “To fix energy ills, rein in environmentalists”) has a misunderstanding about environmentalists and ethanol. The force driving increased ethanol production is agricultural interests.

Mr. Balano would expand oil drilling, but the Department of Energy estimates that the U.S. has less than 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves. The U.S. consumes more than 25 percent of the world’s oil, so expanded drilling would not significantly increase supplies or reduce prices.

Mr. Balano would increase the use of coal, since new technology reduces pollution. He fails to consider the environmental damage just from mining the coal (mountaintop removal throws pollutants right into our rivers), greenhouse gas emissions from burning coal and the rising cost of coal due to increasing worldwide demand and the inevitability of carbon taxes.

Money, time and effort would be better spent on reducing our reliance on oil and coal with increased efficiency and renewable energy. Not doing so only prolongs the problem.

Byron Combs
Kansas City

Hooray for Ross Balano’s column. I’d like to expand on one point. He writes, “Remember all the dire predictions about the Alaska pipeline before it was built? Those proved to be unfounded.” Precisely.

All you “environmentalists” who are against developing 2,000 acres out of 19 million acres of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge need to visit vast land swaths in western Kansas. There, cattle graze and millions of bushels of wheat are harvested, while oil wells all around them nod up and down and new oil derricks drill new holes. ANWAR is thought to contain at least 10 billion barrels of oil.

It’s a no-brainer. The internal combustion engine, fueled by hydrocarbon products, is the greatest industrial invention of all time. The United States’ standard of living was greatly increased by this discovery. Can we please let the marketplace keep working for us, instead of against us?

Dyrk Dugan
Overland Park

Ross Balano hit the nail on the head. It is sad that our country has no energy plan, but not much can be expected when leadership is lacking in both parties.

If the environmentalists of today had been around 150 years ago, we probably would not have many conveniences and comforts we enjoy today. Natural gas and the installation of gas lines would have been said to be too hazardous and destructive. Power, phone and transmission lines and poles would have been deemed too unsightly and environmentally unfriendly. The same could have been said of automobiles, airplanes, highways, skyscrapers and other advancements to which we are accustomed.

Protecting the environment is important, but common sense must be exercised doing so.

Austin E. Van Buskirk
Kansas City

Bus station could use ‘green’

It was good to read that MoDOT has “turned that corner” regarding green alternatives (5/3, Letters). Steve Porter pointed out the native grasses that have been planted in various medians and along road corridors. While I applaud this effort, I am deeply disappointed that MoDOT did not turn the green corner before building the bus transit station at Red Bridge and 71 Highway.

There is nothing green about it. The entire parking area and the medians installed on Red Bridge are simply more endless pavement.

Buffalo grass or native flowers would have been a welcome sight and certainly would have cut down on the amount of runoff to already overloaded catch basins. Even a tree or two would have been nice. They would be good for the environment and appreciated by those who leave their cars all day under the blistering sun.

There are also many other green solutions for parking areas, and it’s time MoDOT and this city started implementing them.

Teresa Edens
Kansas City

Coal vs. wind power

Bill Hill of Leawood (5/6, Letters) wrote “Do you think on a hot summer day with no wind, hence no air conditioning, she might change her mind?” regarding Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ opposition to coal-fired power plants in western Kansas.

I realize Leawood borders Missouri, so perhaps Mr. Hill has not seen much of Kansas. The name Kansas means “people of the south wind.” If Mr. Hill would venture farther into the state, he would soon learn that the name is quite apt. Most of the state rarely experiences a windless day.

I grew up in south-central Kansas, mostly Wichita, where one doesn’t really notice the wind until it’s blowing more than 30 miles an hour.

I doubt Gov. Sebelius or the rest of us would suffer on a hot summer day if we were relying on wind-generated power. We would also breathe easier with cleaner air.

Teresa Phillips
Overland Park

I have been watching the debate on the new coal-fired plants in southwest Kansas with interest. Let me see if I have this straight:

No nuclear power.

No expansion of projects to drill for the oil reserves we have.

No new refineries.

No natural gas electrical plants.

Now no coal-fired plants.

OK, which of you anti-everything zealots are willing to turn off all your lights, computers, televisions and cars so I can keep using mine?

Oscar Miller
Easton, Kan.

Air-conditioning overkill

With these recent days of warm weather, local businesses seem ready to kick their air conditioning into high gear. I just sat through my first frigid lunch wishing I’d brought a jacket even though the weather outside was comfortably warm.

I’m not sure which I look forward to least: the oppressive KC summertime heat or the frigid temperatures in most shops and restaurants in response to it.

Do business owners think patrons enjoy carrying jackets with them on hot days so we can be comfortable indoors? Do they think we’ll be impressed by all the money and energy they waste keeping their establishments uncomfortably cool?

Can anybody explain why we feel obligated to keep indoor spaces cooler in the summer than in the winter when we’re already dressed for the cold?

Devin Martin
Kansas City

How green is KC?

So much about our “carbon footprint.” I have changed my lightbulbs. I drive an old, fuel-efficient car. I’ve considered getting a rain barrel.

What about Kansas City’s beautiful new buildings? The Bloch Building at the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, the Sprint Center, the Kauffman Center for the Performing Arts? In what ways are these structures “green?” Or are they?

And how about our beloved Plaza Christmas lights?

Todi Hughes
Kansas City

Earth Day every day

John Askew’s article (4/23, Opinion: “How to Make Earth Day Every Day”) really made me think. I agree that Earth Day is a day when almost everyone does his or her part to help the environment. People make conscious efforts to recycle cans, throw away trash and even plant trees.

However, many people who do these things on Earth Day do not do them every day. We need to take things a step further by incorporating these actions into our everyday lives. We need to protect the Earth we live on and keep the air we breathe fresh.

There are so many things that we can do to help the Earth. We can use organic cleaning products, use cloth napkins instead of paper ones and reuse water bottles. We can carpool or ride bikes, and we can use lunch boxes instead of paper sacks.

Doing these things every day will make all the difference.

Rachel Schwartz
Leawood

Green moves from MoDot

Recent letters (4/20 and 4/26) urge the Missouri Department of Transportation to consider green alternatives. We’ve turned that corner, finding ways to reduce costs, emissions and save energy. Our partners include Missouri Department of Conservation, Grow Native! and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.

MoDOT’s mowing policy ensures that no growth hinders a motorist’s view of approaching traffic. We mow less, particularly in rural areas, where a more verdant right of way blends with the surrounding countryside. In urban and suburban areas, MoDOT mows less often but still maintains a tidy right of way.

MoDOT also mows as a method of weed control, while also using natural means whenever possible, such as thistle weevils instead of herbicide. And we plan new projects to include natural summer grasses such as buffalo grass, which crowds out other vegetation, requires less water and remains short.

Native grasses can be found along the corridors of I-435 from 87th to south of 95th , I-29 north of Route 92, Route 50 east of Lee’s Summit and Route 7 south of Harrisonville; the medians of I-70 throughout Lafayette County; the intersections of I-70 and I-470 and at Route 152 and I-435. Most of these are mowed less than annually.

Steve Porter
Senior community relations specialist, Missouri Department of Transportation
Lee’s Summit

Grow instead of mow

Ryan Philyaw (4/20, Letters) suggests reducing the frequency of mowing along Missouri’s highways this summer. I would take the idea further. Why not seed the medians in Kansas and Missouri with native, drought-resistant grasses and wildflowers? This would be a win-win in so many ways: fewer CO2 emissions, less cost to taxpayers for mowing, a place for wildflowers to grow and, best of all, beautiful highways. Many flowers would reseed for the next season.

Let’s hear a response from the Kansas and Missouri Departments of Transportation.

Shelley Theis
Mission Hills

It’s time to drive 55

The proposal by Congress to increase automobiles’ gas mileage requirement by a few miles by 2020 is the most ineffective solution I’ve ever heard to the current crisis in the cost of gasoline. I do not understand why it has not imposed a 55 mph speed limit. Back in the 1970s, when the government took the gasoline shortage seriously and the limit was in effect, it saved millions of gallons of gas and many lives.

Now, if you should dare to slow down, even in a 55 mph speed zone, you would run the risk of being run over by a big rig. The big truck owners, who have understandably complained loudly about the rising cost of fuel, would be among the greatest beneficiaries of the lower speed limit.

If we are really interested in bringing down the price of gasoline, this would be the quickest and most effective way of doing it.

Jeanette B. Welch
Warrensburg, Mo.

The threat of overpopulation

There have been many newspaper stories about the world food and water shortages, destruction of habitat due to reckless paving and building, pollution of our atmosphere and oceans and all the other major global problems.

The writers of these articles always seem to stop short of stating the real problem, which is the cancerous growth of the human population. From the time humans evolved (yes, I said evolved) it took millions of years for the world population to reach one billion in about 1804.

It took only 123 years for it to reach two billion in 1927. In 1960 it reached three billion.

In 1999 it reached six billion and now it’s more than six and a half. Am I the only one who is terrified by these figures?

This little planet Earth is the only home we’ve got, and if we don’t stop eliminating other plant and animal species by our uncontrolled breeding, we and it are doomed.

Michael Fopeano
Parkville