Well, yes, there is that

Re “Immortal Toil or A Cure for Aging” (cover story, May 10):

The cover of your May 10 edition was as unpatriotic as the accompanying story was incomplete.

Our founding fathers mandated the ultimate cure for aging in the U.S. Constitution: The Second Amendment.

Be well. Raise hell.

Andrew Barbano


Electric letters

Re “The EV nonsense and its buffs” (guest comment, May 17):

Jeffrey Middlebrook claimed that electric vehicles like Tesla didn’t save on fossil fuels because they used more energy to produce than gasoline vehicles. He accused Tesla owners of being dumbasses.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, https://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-nealer/gasoline-vs-electric-global-warming-emissions-953 whom he cited, over the lifetime of the vehicle, the electric car produces less than 50 percent of the gasoline car’s CO2 emissions, including the extra emissions related to production. Doesn’t sound especially dumbass.

Douglas Lowenthal


Re “The EV nonsense and its buffs” (guest comment, May 17):

I took umbrage at the editorial rant. Middlebrook gave us a biased view of the role of EVs in combatting GHG emissions. Maybe the bias was heightened by the haughtiness of some Tesla owners who may take the “holier than thou” role. But the facts need to get straight.

What UCS report does the article refer to? Could it be the 2015 UCS report titled “Cleaner Cars from Cradle to Grave: Electric Cars Beat Gasoline Cars on Lifetime Global Warming Emissions”? Middlebrook seemingly cherry-picked a bit of information from this long and thorough report on EVs. No one who read the entire report would come to the conclusion that MIddlebrook did. True, not “zero emissions” for EVs, but they are significantly better than for fossil-fuel vehicles. The “15 percent” production penalty on EVs is easily erased by the greater efficiency of electric motors versus internal combustion engines in moving a mass down the road over the lifetime of the vehicle. The advantage of EVs is continually being increased as the power on our electric grids comes more and more from renewable energy sources that are not emitting GHGs. Those buying an EV today may well be getting all their power from renewable sources in a few years. When combined with home solar installations, the advantage grows even more.

I have become accustomed to rants in the letters to the editor in the RN&R. But I do expect editorial pieces to give sources, present matters in an unbiased way, and not cherry-pick facts.

David von Seggern


Editor’s note: The EV piece was a guest comment by a reader, not an editorial.

Health angst

Re “Tangled up in red” (cover story,
May 17):

According to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School, the First Amendment “protects … freedom of expression from government interference” and “[t]he right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without government interference or regulation.”

For years I’ve heard stories of retaliatory tactics (“interference”) employed by county health department building officials and by officials in the county and city of Reno building departments, as well as at Truckee Meadows Water Authority and Regional Transportation Commission whenever staff decisions are questioned. There are penalties for breaking the law. What are the penalties for violating the constitution? It’s time for these petty and illegal activities to stop. The texting between staff members, particularly that of derogatory and demeaning epithets and during meetings needs to stop. It is time to end this revolving appointment process to local boards that makes it impossible to hold members accountable.

Until then, it is time we start taking out our angst directly on the county commission and city councils’ members who make these board appointments.

Marcus Krebs


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *