We chose to add solar panels to our roof to reduce our carbon footprint. That’s it.
The cost was a factor, but the contract incentives allowed us to justify losing money at a rate that didn’t hurt as much as continuing to contribute to carbon emissions that warm the planet. That’s it.
The state of California has led the sustainable future energy movement in the U.S. for decades. Why would it now start bean-counting and shaming the affluent to justify a significant reduction in the number of roof-top solar homes in the state that can each reduce their carbon footprint if installed?
It makes no sense if we wish to leave an inhabitable world to our children and grandchildren. Do the math more carefully, and find ways to help solve all the problems. Don’t just assume that sustainability can’t be achieved.
— Tom Clark, Norwalk CT, on behalf of Olivia Clark, Aptos
The Sentinel welcomes your letters to the editor. Letters should be short, no more than 150 words. We do not accept anonymous letters. Letter-writers should include their full name as well as a street address and telephone number. We don’t publish those details in the newspaper, but need the information for verification purposes. Occasionally, we reject letters simply because we’ve had so many on the same subject. Submit your letters online at www.santacruzsentinel.com/submit-letters.