Letters to the Editor: Ban flavored tobacco now; Don't be fooled about nuclear;

Letters to the Editor: Ban flavored tobacco now; Don't be fooled about nuclear;

{{featured_button_text}}

Ban flavored tobacco now

I appreciate you covering the local ordinance to ban flavors, however the focus on self-interested vape shop owners was concerning. The vape industry, formerly known as Big Tobacco, has used flavors to hook kids. For every adult who has switched to JUULs, 81 youth have used a JUUL. That is 81 kids to every one adult. That is not an accident.

The industry, (a $40 billion industry) has chosen to market to kids using flavors as the hook. They have developed over 15,000 flavors with names like “Unicorn Poop” “Unicorn Vomit” and other juvenile oriented flavors. It is a shame that the adults in the community have let Big Tobacco have free rein up until now.

Do not be fooled by local peddlers of this poison who want you to feel empathy because their stores may close. Their customers are youth, or are local dealers who buy their products then sell them on campus to youth. Seventy-four percent of students report that they get their vapes form a local store and only 6% say they get it online. I urge all citizens to say enough to the marketing to kids and stop Big Tobacco from hooking this generation to fill their coffers. Ban flavored tobacco now.

Edwin Weaver

Santa Maria

Don't be fooled about nuclear

A recent letter writer's comment about trying to save PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear facility is misleading at best.

First off, he apparently didn't attend or forgot many of the critical details around the Coastal Commission hearings a few years ago. The fact that the state of California would have closed Diablo years earlier due to the damages it does to coastal waters was ignored.

For PG&E to abide by state law the facility would have to spend over $5 billion in new cooling towers before it could comply with state law. The economics of an aging facilility with old pipes and equipment have led to many reactors closing if they weren't given sizable subsidies. We tried that in 1996. Remember the $28 billion in stranded costs we gave to PG&E and SoCal Edison that were supposed to cover $12 billion in construction and financing of Diablo due to three seismic related rebuilds?

The percentage of power Diablo represents is not 10% either but varies and can be half that. Furthermore, because of its size, federal law requires that an equal block of very expensive backup power be maintained in case the facility goes down. And yes, due to its location PG&E acknowledged that half of its power was not needed, and oh yes, solar initiates in the last five years have all but replaced Diablo with new solar already.

What continues is just how easily nuclear proponents gloss over the spent fuel problem, seismic safety issues and of course the facilities own controversial history. Feeble attempts to downplay these issues don't wash.

Roger Herried

San Francisco

0
0
0
0
0

Tags

Be the first to know

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.

Topics

News Alert

Breaking News