To the Editor:
Students with Divest Dartmouth ("The Cost of Divestment," May 22) have not properly researched the implications of their campaign. Otherwise, they would know the following points: First, today's climate change is not out of bounds with the natural variability that geologists have seen in the past. Second, the idea that dangerous climate change will occur due to emissions from human activities is merely a hypothesis, and one that is looking increasingly improbable as science advances. Third, if dangerous changes were to happen, we should increase our use of hydrocarbon fuels, especially coal, which is the cheapest and most abundant source of power.
In the event of climate problems, more electricity would be needed to meet greater demands for air conditioning and heating. More power would be required to irrigate land, build dikes, strengthen public infrastructure and relocate populations in at-risk areas. Yet the students promote unreliable and expensive wind and solar power instead of cheap and reliable hydrocarbon fuels.
Moving away from our strongest power sources because of climate concerns is analogous to a ship captain ordering his crew into lifeboats in a severe storm. It would be suicide to abandon ship exactly when the protection of a sturdy vessel is most needed. Similarly, it is suicide to attempt to quickly move away from today's dependable energy sources, no matter what the climate does.
