On rooftop solar
As a supporter of rooftop solar and appellant of four carport solar projects that the San Luis Coastal Unified School District intends to build at area school sites, I read with great interest the article about rooftop solar titled, “A renewable investment” (Dec. 13).
The article states, “The San Luis Coastal Unified School District has announced plans to install carport-like structures with solar panels on top of them at campuses. The district estimates it could save from $6 million to $8 million in energy costs over the next 20 years.”
Those cost-saving estimates are long gone. Through reductions in size and scope, the projected savings have been reduced to just $3 million over 20 years. For a myriad of reasons, numerous San Luis Coastal schools have been removed from project contention, though ironically, none of the four that have been appealed.
The article seriously understates the loss of as many as 130 trees projectwide by saying, “Some trees in parking lots would have to be removed.”
If the San Luis Coastal Unified School District was using rooftop technology similar to J&J Cellars, more schools could be included in the project, cost savings would be increased and environmental impacts (including tree removal) would be reduced.
I was happy to see the State Parks taking action to verify particles of sand caused by off-road vehicles in The Tribune article titled, “State Parks to study Dunes wind” (Dec. 14).
What I don’t understand is why Katrina Dolinsky and the Santa Lucia Sierra Club want to appeal the decision against the five data-collecting towers. If their data is scientifically accurate and peer-reviewed, you would think they would be happy that State Parks is taking this action and the data they collect would only back up their study.
Why would you ever want to appeal something that would only make your information more valid? Oh, unless!
Michael Van Belleghem
Recently, The Tribune ran an article about how the United States trails in education in comparison to 33 other countries, putting us in 17th place in science and 25th in math (“U.S. trails in education ranking,” Dec. 8).
Wow! The most powerful nation in the world has such a lousy ranking with close to half a million students tested. Our scoring is a disgrace and an embarrassment to our educational systems.
We were ranked 14th in reading, and I suspect it is even lower because most people in our society read and understand at the eighth-grade level of reading or below. The Chinese scores were strong in all three subjects.
Where does that place us in the future? At the bottom of the barrel or thereabouts?
Print still useful
I publish books and blogs online, pay my bills online and sometimes shop online, but I read Bill Morem and Bob Cuddy on my lap, not my laptop, and will continue to as long as we all shall live.