Professor Courtney Young wants someone to tell him what the plan is (The Billings Gazette, Feb. 8, 2018). One would think he would be helping to create a responsible plan. That may be expecting too much. Given his references to apartheid and tobacco, in the same sentence as his reference to "climateers," Mr. Young's narrow focus is obvious. He cares about the fossil fuel industry. It is understandable that he might tend to have tunnel vision on his livelihood when that livelihood is threatened. However, even with his vested interest, it would be refreshing if Mr. Young could embrace an "all of the above" position on energy sources.
It's easy to cherry pick statistics to tell one side of the story of tax credits, subsidies, and unit costs of one energy source. For example, some people want to ignore the environmental costs of cleaning up the hazardous waste sites created by the fossil fuel industry. They ignore it until, and even after, a dam breaks (e.g., Gold King Mine, Kingston Fossil Plant, fracking wastewater spills) or a pipeline breaks under a river, and creates a mess. How many of these ticking bombs are out there?
One thing that Mr. Young did not state is whether he is one of the anti-science climate-change deniers. I thank The Gazette for publishing Mr. Young's column. It helps Montanans know what views are being espoused in the engineering department at Montana Tech, which, surely Mr. Young would agree, is one of the American universities.