Nuclear waste clean up

still needed at Westlake

"Nuclear workers honored" (Oct. 31) was a nice article about a celebration of former nuclear plant workers who worked and sacrificed themselves to clean up the nuclear waste sites from the Mallinckrodt chemical plant in the St. Louis area.

There are still nuclear waste sites today in St. Louis that are being cleaned up by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The sites are in the downtown St. Louis area, a north St. Louis County site and several St. Louis County sites.

There is one nuclear waste landfill site that is not being cleaned up: The West Lake Landfill in Bridgeton. It is in the flood plain of the Missouri River and near the drinking water intake plants for St. Louis north of Interstate 70 and the city of St. Louis.

The radioactive waste will continue to release dangerous isotopes and rays for thousands of years. And our congressional leaders and most of our state leaders have refused to get involved.

Rea Beck Kleeman — Clayton



Powering choice

An important qualifier to the story "Electric choice arrives in Illinois" (Oct. 28) should be noted. While it is true that alternative suppliers just now are beginning to offer service to residential customers, Illinois commercial and industrial customers have been shopping in a vibrant competitive power market for years. Electric choice hasn't just "arrived" in Illinois; it is celebrating its 10th anniversary.

In its 2009 Retail Market Development Annual Report, the Illinois Commerce Commission found that 73 percent of all non-residential users and more than 90 percent of large industrial and public-sector energy users are buying power from a competitive supplier instead of the regulated utility. More than half of all the electricity used in Illinois is provided by retail suppliers, not utilities.

Consumer choice has been very good for Illinois businesses and, therefore, the Illinois economy. In the coming years, as alternative suppliers expand their offerings into the residential market, we expect Illinois households to gain similar benefits that larger users of electricity have realized for many years.

Kevin Wright — Chicago

President, Illinois Competitive Energy Association, and former chairman and commissioner, Illinois Commerce Commission



Renewable energy now

Washington University Chancellor Mark S. Wrighton, in his commentary "New technology will ensure America's energy future" (Oct. 29), accurately and eloquently described the current climate scenario in which we find ourselves and recognized the need for comprehensive energy reform.

However, I do not understand why he asserted that "establish[ing] the technological viability and cost of capturing and safely storing CO2 emitted from coal-fired power plant[s]" is a "near term" imperative and relegates the development and deployment of renewable energy technologies (solar, wind, geothermal, hydro) to a "long-term" priority.

A 2008 Center for American Progress report notes that Joe Lucas, spokesman for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, has acknowledged that carbon storage and sequestration is 10 years to 15 years from being an energy option. Conversely, the city of Rock Port, Mo., now produces 100 percent of its power from wind.

Given that the world's top climate scientists say that carbon emissions must peak no later than 2015, it is clear to any rational person that employing the renewable energy technology like wind and solar, which we already have, is the short-term priority for averting the consequences of climate change.

Perhaps if Wash U had not added the chairmen and CEOs of Peabody Energy and Arch Coal Inc. to its board of trustees this summer, Mr. Wrighton would have presented the facts as they are, not as coal companies wish they were.

Chelsea Ritter-Soronen — St. Louis



Support entrepreneurs

Regarding "What went wrong at Straub's?" (Oct. 30): As a lifelong St. Louisan, I always have had a high regard for Straub's as a model corporate citizen, always giving back to our community.

It is outrageous that the story was not supportive of a local family-owned business, especially when it is going through difficult times. St. Louis, unlike other big cities, has family-owned grocery stores such as Schnucks, Dierbergs and Straub's. When many corporations are leaving St. Louis, why wouldn't the paper support a St. Louis-owned business? Big-box stores already threaten area businesses.

All you have to do is look at the departure or sale of companies such as Southwestern Bell, Anheuser-Busch, General Dynamics and TWA to realize the tremendous negative impact these losses have on our region. When St. Louis is trying to attract and retain businesses and the jobs they create, why would the paper criticize someone who genuinely tried to expand his business and create 125 new jobs?

Just as political figures find it disdainful for critics to involve their families, I am offended by the attack on Mr. Straub's family and the mention of his children. It is high time for the paper to find constructive ways to support the entrepreneurs in our community.

Kimberly Svenson Weas — Town and Country

Separate coverage

I have a suggestion for the first concrete step toward health care reform, which has Congress tied in knots: separate coverage for basic health concerns and treatments from "advanced" coverage for more complex concerns and treatments. Leave the former to government, but keep government out of the latter.

In this way, the government could provide universal coverage for an agreed-upon array of foundational matters such as vaccinations, flu shots, dental exams, well-baby clinics, hypertension medicine, etc., most of which is preventative and promotes better health in succeeding years.

Insurance companies could provide coverage for much more sophisticated concerns such as kidney transplants, heart valve replacements, deep-brain stimulation for Parkinson's, etc.

Everyone deserves to have decent teeth and controls for high blood pressure. Not everyone needs to have access to every possible advanced medical procedure.

James W. Voelz — Des Peres



TSA-style health care

I went on a business trip last week. It was a one-day trip that required me to fly to Dallas. At about 6 in the morning, I found myself waiting in line for the Transportation Security Administration screening. It was a long line. I was surrounded by people I didn't know, but we all were waiting for the same "service."

I'm not sure who started the conversation, but someone noticed that it was what universal health care would be like. The TSA employees working there had no incentive to be faster (or, for that matter, courteous) because there is no alternative. We could expect the same poor service, long lines and bureaucrats with no accountability.

And, as irritating as the process is, you dare not complain. I guess we're stuck with that if we want to fly; after all it's in everyone's best interest, right?

Please keep government out of my health care.

Matt Doell — Eureka

Just as dangerous

I appreciated "Decline a breath test, lose your license?" (Nov. 1), a lead article in the Sunday paper about people who refuse breathalyzer tests but keep on driving.

Maybe next Sunday, the paper can run an article about those psychopaths who drive around while talking on a cell phone. They are just as dangerous.

Ken J. Paynton — Stanton, Mo.