Subterms
On the heels of Earth’s warmest year, January was the eighth month in a row in which global temperatures blew past previous records.The exceptional warmth that first enveloped the planet last summer is continuing strong into 2024: Last month clocked in as the hottest January ever measured, the European Union climate monitor announced on Thursday. More
The E.P.A. says the new rule will prevent 4,500 premature deaths annually. Industry leaders are expected to challenge the regulation, saying it will harm the economy.The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday tightened limits on fine industrial particles, one of the most common and deadliest forms of air pollution, for the first time in a decade.Business groups immediately objected, saying the new regulation could raise costs and hurt manufacturing jobs across the country. Public health organizations said the pollution rules would save lives and strengthen the economy by reducing hospitalizations and lost workdays.Fine particulate matter, which can include soot, can come from factories, power plants and other industrial facilities. It can penetrate the lungs and bloodstream and has been linked to serious health effects like asthma and heart and lung disease. Long-term exposure has been associated with premature deaths.The new rule lowers the annual standard for fine particulate matter to nine micrograms per cubic meter of air, down from the current standard of 12 micrograms. Over the next two years, the E.P.A. will use air sampling to identify areas that do not meet the new standard. States would then have 18 months to develop compliance plans for those areas. By 2032, any that exceed the new standard could face penalties.“Soot pollution is one of the most dangerous forms of air pollution,” Michael S. Regan, the E.P.A. administrator, said in a call with reporters on Tuesday. “This is truly a game changer for the health and well-being of communities in our country.”Mr. Regan estimated that the rule would prevent 4,500 premature deaths every year and 290,000 lost workdays because of illness. The E.P.A. maintained that the rule also would deliver as much as $46 billion in net health benefits in the first year that the standards would be fully implemented.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More
Firefighters, many of them volunteers, have been confronting dozens of blazes amid high temperatures this month. The conditions have been linked to climate change.Helicopters hauling buckets of water fly toward the mountains where fires burn, a thick haze periodically covers the sky, and residents have been ordered to wear masks and limit driving because of the poor air quality.For a full week, firefighters have been battling fires in the mountains around Bogotá, Colombia’s capital, as dozens of other blazes have burned across the country, in what officials say is the hottest January in three decades.The president has declared a national disaster and asked for international help fighting the fires, which he says could reach beyond the Andes Mountains and erupt on the Pacific Coast and in the Amazon.Colombia’s fires this month are unusual in a country where people are more accustomed to torrential rain and mudslides than fire and ash. They have been attributed to high temperatures and drought exacerbated by the climate phenomenon known as El Niño.Ricardo Lozano, a geologist and former environment minister of Colombia, said El Niño was a natural phenomenon that occurred cyclically, but that with climate change, “these events are more and more intense and more and more extreme.”Heavy smoke from wildfires near the capital, Bogotá.Federico Rios for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? More
Republicans and some Democrats tried to repeal a waiver issued by the Biden administration that allows federally funded E.V. chargers to be made from imported iron and steel.President Biden on Wednesday vetoed a Republican-led effort that could have thwarted the administration’s plans to invest $7.5 billion to build electric vehicle charging stations across the country.In issuing the veto, Mr. Biden argued that the congressional resolution would have hurt domestic manufacturing as well as the clean energy transition.“If enacted, this resolution would undermine the hundreds of millions of dollars that the private sector has already invested in domestic E.V. charging manufacturing, and chill further domestic investment in this critical market,” Mr. Biden said in a statement.The move comes amid a growing political divide over electric vehicles. The Biden administration is aggressively promoting them as an important part of the fight to slow global warming. The landmark climate law signed in 2022 by Mr. Biden, the Inflation Reduction Act, offers incentives to consumers to buy electric vehicles and to manufacturers to build them in the United States.Republicans, including former President Donald J. Trump, Mr. Biden’s likely challenger in the 2024 election, have attacked electric vehicles as unreliable, inconvenient and ceding America’s auto manufacturing to China, which dominates the supply chain for electric vehicles.Republicans, with some Democrats, voted to repeal a waiver issued by the Biden administration that allows federally funded electric vehicle chargers to be made from imported iron and steel, as long as they are assembled in the United States.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? More
The leaders and executives gathering at the World Economic Forum are obsessed with elections and artificial intelligence, not Ukraine or Gaza.Each day this week has brought a new and fleeting reminder to the executives and politicians at the annual World Economic Forum meeting of the two wars threatening global security and clouding the economy. Ukraine’s president spoke on Tuesday. Israel’s spoke on Thursday.Neither was able to hold the collective attention of a gathering that this year has focused overwhelmingly on artificial intelligence and populist politics.Gaza and Ukraine have made daily appearances on the public agenda in Davos, along with climate change and economic inequality. But in the warm halls and slushy streets around town, conversations almost inevitably turn to the two accelerating trends that are destabilizing business models and democracies.Everyone wants to talk about how A.I. and this year’s elections, especially in the United States, could shake up the world. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel led by Hamas or the ensuing Israeli bombing of Gaza? Drowned out in comparison.“No one is talking about Israel,” said Rachel Goldberg, who came to Davos to urge action to free the more than 100 hostages who were taken on Oct. 7 and continue to be held by Hamas, including her 23-year-old son, Hersh.In an interview on Wednesday, Ms. Goldberg said she was not surprised the war had taken a back seat here. “I think it’s complicated,” she said. “And I think it’s very polarizing.”Davos is many things layered on top of one another. It is a font of wealthy idealism, where the phrase “committed to improving the state of the world” frequently adorns the walls of the main meeting center.The forum is a networking event where chief executives, world leaders, celebrities, philanthropists and journalists speed-date through half-hour coffee meetings. It is a trade show for big ideas, with overlapping panel discussions on topics including gender equity, media misinformation and the transition to green energy.It is also a venue for top government officials to speak on grave issues, including war. That is where much of the Gaza and Ukraine discussion played out this week.President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine and Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, meeting on Tuesday.Laurent Gillieron/Keystone, via Associated PressPresident Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine called for international aid — but not more weapons — in a packed-house address on Tuesday to hundreds of people. He also took questions from reporters afterward.Without more assistance from the United States and others, Mr. Zelensky said, “a huge crisis will happen.” He added: “We have a war now, and we will have a huge crisis — a crisis for the whole of Europe.”Several leaders spoke about Gaza and the broader conflict it has spawned in the Middle East, though typically to smaller crowds. In a room of about 60 attendees on Wednesday, Mohammad Mustafa, the chairman of Palestine Investment Fund and the former deputy prime minister of Palestine, called for additional international aid for the people in Gaza and for an end to the war.“The military action has got to stop very quickly,” Mr. Mustafa said. “There is no need for anyone to build their political careers at the expense of more Palestinian people.”Hossein Amir Abdollahian, the foreign minister of Iran, blamed Israel for raising tensions in the Middle East in the past several months. “If the genocide in Gaza stops, then it will lead to the end of the other crises and attacks in the region,” he said.In his Thursday speech, President Isaac Herzog of Israel called Iran the center of an “empire of evil” destabilizing the Middle East and displayed a photograph of Kfir Bibas, a 1-year-old hostage being held in Gaza. “We have a very cruel, sadistic enemy who has taken a decision to try to torture the Israeli national psyche as well as the hostages themselves,” Mr. Herzog said.But those speeches rarely dominated the conversations on the sidelines of the event, at the nightly private dinners after the day’s agenda concluded or in most of the storefronts that large corporations paid to transform into branded event spaces along the main promenade in town.President Isaac Herzog of Israel with a picture of Kfir Bibas, a child who was taken hostage by Hamas, on Thursday.Denis Balibouse/ReutersOne possible explanation: Attendees and leaders here do not view either war as a significant threat at the moment to the global economy. Neither Gaza nor Ukraine cracked the Top 10 near-term concerns in the Global Risk Report — a survey of 1,500 global leaders — that the forum released on the eve of the gathering. A World Economic Forum chief economists’ report released this week suggested that growth forecasts for the Middle East had “slightly weakened” amid uncertainties about the war between Israel and Hamas. It did not mention Ukraine.In private conversations around Davos this week, corporate leaders acknowledged the wars in Gaza and Ukraine as one of many concerns. But they grew much more animated about other topics that they said they expected to affect their businesses in the near term — potentially enormously, for good or ill.A.I. topped that list. In interviews, executives expounded, usually with significant enthusiasm, on the benefits and drawbacks of the technology. They also talked politics, exhaustively. Over dinner, they and other attendees debated whether former President Donald J. Trump would win back the White House in November — and how his populist, protectionist policy could roil markets and upend their business models.Some executives explicitly ranked Gaza and Ukraine lower than the American elections on their list of geopolitical concerns. Many attendees lamented that there was not more energy behind war discussions, or recognition of the risks the wars pose to the economy and global security. Last year, concerns about Ukraine shared the spotlight at the gathering, along with a surge of A.I. interest.This year, “everyone is focusing on other subjects,” Pascal Cagni, France’s ambassador for international exports, said in an interview. Economically and politically, he added, Ukraine is “a critical issue.”There were a few exceptions. Supporters of Ukraine opened their own storefront space on the main promenade and staged several events each day to draw attention to the conflict. The technology company Palantir and its chief executive, Alex Karp, hosted Ms. Goldberg and other parents of hostages for events and interviews.Waiting for the arrival of Mr. Zelensky at the Ukraine House in Davos on Tuesday.Gian Ehrenzeller/EPA, via ShutterstockSeveral governments sent leaders to Davos in an attempt to quietly advance back-channel diplomacy in Ukraine or Gaza. That was true of the Biden administration, which sent Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and Jake Sullivan, the White House’s national security adviser, to Davos for a flurry of meetings centered on Gaza.In an interview on Wednesday, Ms. Goldberg said she was grateful for all efforts to bring her son and the other hostages home. She wore “103” taped to her sweater, which represented the number of days since her son had been taken.In Davos, Ms. Goldberg was sharing a house with other parents of hostages. “I walked out this morning and here, you know, you have these, like, gorgeous views and beautiful mountains,” she said. She said she had turned to another mother and said: “It’s so beautiful. It’s perverse.”But, she added a moment later: “I’m very grateful that I’m here. Because I am having access to people that I would never have access to. And the goal is to save Hersh’s life, and everyone who is there, their lives. I can only do that if we have access to people who have power. And that’s people who are here.”Reporting was contributed by More
About half of the world’s population will be electing leaders this year.More than 40 countries that are home to about half of the world’s population — including the United States, India and South Africa — will be electing their leaders this year.My colleagues at The Times report that it’s “one of the largest and most consequential democratic exercises in living memory,” which “will affect how the world is run for decades to come.”Climate is front and center on many of the ballots. The leaders chosen in this year’s elections will face daunting challenges laid out in global climate commitments for the end of the decade, such as ending deforestation, tripling renewable energy capacity and sharply reducing greenhouse gas emissions.Here are the issues and races to watch closely:Major climate policies at stakeClimate change is one of the issues on which Republicans and Democrats are farthest apart.President Biden signed what many called the most powerful climate legislation in the country’s history. Former President Trump, who is likely to be the Republican presidential candidate — especially after his victory in the Iowa caucuses — withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement, the 2015 treaty that guided much of the world’s progress in curbing climate change.Republicans have also prepared a sweeping strategy called Project 2025 if Trump wins back the White House. As my colleague Lisa Friedman wrote last year, “the plan calls for shredding regulations to curb greenhouse gas pollution from cars, oil and gas wells and power plants, dismantling almost every clean energy program in the federal government and boosting the production of fossil fuels.”Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, is expected to seek re-election.Martin Divisek/EPA, via ShutterstockEuropean Union incumbents will also be defending their climate policies, known as the Green Deal, in elections for the European Parliament in June. Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president who is expected to seek re-election by the European Parliament, kicked off a series of policies designed to ensure the bloc achieves carbon neutrality by 2050. But opposition to these policies is growing. Farmers in several countries have tried to block measures to restore natural ecosystems, while homeowners have grown increasingly worried about the cost of the green energy transition.Opinion polls analyzed by Reuters in a commentary piece suggest far-right lawmakers, who oppose Green Deal policies, will grow in number but remain a minority. Climate may also play a role in elections in Britain, which may happen in the second half of the year. They became a key point of disagreement between the Labour Party and the governing Conservative Party, which are trailing in the polls, after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak rolled back some of the country’s most ambitious climate policies.The future of coalCountries that rely heavily on coal as a source of energy, such as India, Indonesia and South Africa, are also going to the polls this year. In South Africa, elections could influence how fast the country is able to switch to renewables. Any shake up to the ruling African National Congress’ hold on power could boost the shift to renewables, my colleague Lynsey Chutel, who covers South Africa, told me.Environmental activists demonstrated outside of Standard Bank South Africa in Johannesburg, South Africa, in September.Kim Ludbrook/EPA, via ShutterstockRight now, one of the party’s most powerful leaders is an energy minister who has fiercely defended the country’s continued use of coal. Many voters are angry at the A.N.C. for its inability to address an energy crisis partially created by aging coal plants.There seems to be less room for a shift in the elections in Indonesia and India. My colleague Suhasini Raj, who is based in India, told me that, despite high rates of pollution and the pressure on India to let go of coal, the current prime minister Narendra Modi is likely to be re-elected and continue his pro-coal policies.In Indonesia none of the candidates running for president have put forward a concrete plan to transition to clean energy, Mongabay, an environmental news service, reported. The country is by far the world’s biggest exporter of coal. Oil on the ballotFor leaders in oil producing nations around the world, balancing climate policies and drilling has been a delicate act that will be tested on the ballot.President Biden risked losing the support of many climate-conscious voters when he approved Willow, an $8 billion oil drilling project on pristine federal land in Alaska. But Biden’s support for more drilling has been, at least in part, an effort to curb inflation, which angers many more voters.Claudia Sheinbaum’s presidential campaign in Mexico is also balancing climate proposals with her country’s dependence on oil. A climate scientist who is now the mayor of Mexico City, Sheinbaum is a protégé of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, whose administration has tried to boost the oil sector’s role in the country’s economy.Claudia Sheinbaum, running for president in Mexico.Carlos Lopez/EPA, via ShutterstockSheinbaum, a favorite to win in June, has vowed to act to protect the climate. But it’s unclear how much Obrador’s oil legacy will color her policies. “We are going to keep advancing with renewable energies and with the protection of the environment, but without betraying the people of Mexico,” she told voters, according to Bloomberg.The oil industry is also on the ballot in Venezuela and Russia, where it lends strength to authoritarian leaders.Vladimir Putin’s re-election — and his disregard for the climate — seems to be a foregone conclusion. But, in Nicolás Maduro’s Venezuela, there is tiny window for change, though it seems to be closing fast.Venezuela freed five political prisoners in October after the United States vowed to lift some sanctions to its oil industry if it holds free and fair elections. But the main opposition candidate is still banned from running.It may sound contradictory, but some investment in Venezuela’s oil sector could help clean it up. As my colleagues reported last year, government dysfunction has left the industry unable to maintain minimum safeguards, with devastating consequences to the environment.We will report back with key developments on these races throughout the year. When it comes to the climate crisis, even far-off elections have implications for us all. Plaintiffs in the Loper Bright Enterprises case, from left, William Bright, Wayne Reichle and Stefan Axelsson, in Cape May, N.J.Rachel Wisniewski for The New York TimesA Supreme Court case could dismantle federal regulationThe Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on Wednesday for a case that could severely curb the federal government’s regulatory power, with potentially drastic repercussions for the climate.The case is about a group of commercial fishermen who oppose a government fee designed to help prevent overfishing. But a victory for the fishermen could achieve a long-sought goal of the conservative legal movement: undermining a longstanding legal doctrine known as the Chevron deference.That could have implications for the environment, but also health care, finance, telecommunications and other sectors, legal experts told my colleague Hiroko Tabuchi.“It might all sound very innocuous,” said Jody Freeman, founder and director of the Harvard Law School Environmental and Energy Law Program. “But it’s connected to a much larger agenda, which is essentially to disable and dismantle federal regulation.”The Chevron deference was created by a 1984 Supreme Court ruling involving the oil and gas giant. It empowers federal agencies to interpret ambiguities in laws passed by Congress. Weakening or eliminating the Chevron deference would limit the agencies’s ability to interpret the laws they administer. A victory for the fishermen would also shift power from agencies to judges, my colleague Adam Liptak wrote.The lawyers who have helped to propel the case to the nation’s highest court have a powerful backer: the petrochemicals billionaire Charles Koch. Court records show that the lawyers who represent the New Jersey-based fishermen also work for Americans for Prosperity, a group funded by Koch, who is a champion of anti-regulatory causes.In their briefs, the groups supporting the fishermen pointed out that the Chevron deference has fallen out of favor at the Supreme Court in recent years, and several justices have criticized it.Justice Clarence Thomas was initially a backer of the Chevron deference, writing the concurring opinion in 2005 that expanded its protections. But Thomas, who has close ties to the Koch’s political network, has since renounced his earlier ruling. Other climate newsNearly a quarter of humanity were living under drought in 2022 and 2023, the United Nations estimates.The Biden administration announced a plan to charge oil and gas companies a steep fee for emitting methane.John Kerry, President Biden’s special envoy for climate, plans to step down in the spring.A U.S. government map that show extreme weather threats now frequently covers almost the whole country.Chevron, the oil giant, and other companies are building an underground hydrogen battery in Utah.Denial about climate change is on the rise, according to an analysis of 12,000 disinformation videos by U.K. researchers, Grist reports.Colombia created its newest national park by befriending the traditional ranches that surround it.The Crochet Coral Reef, a long-running craft-science collaborative artwork, is the environmental version of the AIDS quilt. More
More from our inbox:About Taylor SwiftLess Polluting TrucksUnity in Canadian Hockey Illustration by Rebecca Chew/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “This Election Year Is Unlike Any Other” (editorial, Jan. 7):The editorial board deserves a monumental “thank you!” for spelling out in such detail how uniquely dangerous Donald Trump is. There was no misguided nod to both-sides-ism here. This was the full-throated condemnation of Donald Trump that the facts demand. The actions that Mr. Trump is openly pledging to carry out would create political and social disaster.Therefore, the editorial board needs to repeat this unvarnished message regularly, matching Mr. Trump’s constant repetition of his lies and provocations to violence.The editorial board must also include in future condemnations that the country cannot afford four years of climate inaction. Mr. Trump would give the fossil fuel industry a free hand and totally squander four years that are crucial to accelerate reductions in air pollution and carbon emissions, and create clean energy infrastructure across the nation.The horrendous results of a complete standstill in climate action that a Trump presidency guarantees are too horrific to imagine.Gary StewartLaguna Beach, Calif.To the Editor:Dire warnings about a second Trump term from The New York Times and other media outlets are being ignored at best and fueling the MAGA movement’s hunger to “own the libs” at worst.Many Americans are unfortunately tuned out and exhausted from politics thanks to Donald Trump’s wearing us down to a nub. The constant noise and slow-motion boil of disorder have left much of our nation cynically apathetic to the danger on the horizon.Whether this was by Mr. Trump’s design or just dumb luck is anyone’s guess. But this mix of chaos and civic ennui is his best ally.I predict that Mr. Trump will win and we all will be thrust back into the anarchy of his first term, but worse, as your paper warns.Miles KahnQueensTo the Editor:It’s time to move from opinion to action. It is not inevitable that Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee. We can all help to deny him the nomination by voting for whoever is polling most strongly against Mr. Trump at the time of the Republican primary.In New York, if you are not already a registered Republican, you can change your party affiliation easily.If you live elsewhere, the website PrimaryPivot has links to every state’s requirements. Some states allow any registered voter to cast a ballot in the Republican primary; others allow both Republicans and independents.We can certainly stop Mr. Trump in his tracks. Let’s do it.Helene PresskreischerNeedham, Mass.To the Editor:The no-holds-barred opinion pieces in your Jan. 7 paper — the editorial “This Election Year Is Unlike Any Other” and Maureen Dowd’s column, “Time to Conquer Hell” — acutely explicate Donald Trump’s flawed character and the potential dangers that would descend on the world if, God forbid, he is elected again to the presidency.The fact that after all the years we have endured his despicable public behavior and utterances there are still millions of Americans today who consider him appealing and fit for office, necessitating the publication of such opinion pieces, is mind-boggling and painfully demoralizing.Jim BellisKfar Vradim, IsraelAbout Taylor SwiftDuring the Eras Tour, Ms. Swift traps her past selves — including those from her “Lover” era — in glass closets.John Shearer/Getty Images for TAS Rights ManagementTo the Editor:Re “Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do,” by Anna Marks (Opinion guest essay, Jan. 7):I’m deeply disappointed with this article’s interrogation of Taylor Swift’s sexuality. Though it began with useful commentary on the evolution of L.G.B.T. rights in country music, it devolved into pointless speculation the moment it mentioned Taylor Swift. Her sexuality is no one’s business but her own — full stop.As Ms. Swift writes in the prologue to “1989 (Taylor’s Version)”: “If I only hung out with my female friends, people couldn’t sensationalize or sexualize that — right? I would learn later on that people could and people would.”Few of us would speculate so publicly about a friend’s sexuality out of respect for their privacy. I see no reason this courtesy should not be extended to celebrities, including but not limited to Taylor Swift.If Ms. Marks wants to interpret Ms. Swift’s music through a queer lens, then she should. After all, Ms. Swift’s talent lies in her ability to tell highly specific stories about her own life that we all relate to because of their universal themes. However, sharing her interpretation of Ms. Swift’s own sexuality has no intellectual value. She deserves better.Amanda WassermanNew YorkLess Polluting Trucks Jeffrey MilsteinTo the Editor:Re “Electrify All the Big, Noisy, Belching Trucks” (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, Dec. 30): Andrea Marpillero-Colomina is right to emphasize the need for a national framework to reduce emissions. She is also right to highlight the impact that pollution from all sources imposes on communities like Hunts Point in the Bronx. Where she errs, however, is minimizing reasonable concerns about electric vehicle infrastructure and ignoring the significant industry progress on emissions.In New York, 90 percent of communities rely exclusively on trucks to deliver goods of all kinds, including food and medicine, the delivery of which would be delayed and more expensive without a cohesive charging infrastructure. This isn’t just an inconvenience for our nation’s truck drivers; lack of chargers and alternative fueling stations will have significant supply chain impacts, ultimately affecting consumers’ wallets.Fortunately, real progress is being made — and has been for some time. Since 1974, clean diesel technology has already reduced pollutants by 99 percent, and 60 trucks today equal the output of one in 1988. The trucking industry is committed to reducing the environmental impacts of moving freight and continues to invest in clean technology, including electric vehicles.In other words, big, noisy, belching trucks are already a relic of yesteryear. Americans need and deserve real plans to build on that progress — not flashy rhetoric.Kendra HemsClifton Park, N.Y.The writer is president of the Trucking Association of New York.Unity in Canadian HockeyA display outside the Vidéotron Center teaches fans about the history of the Nordiques.Renaud Philippe for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Long-Gone Hockey Team Remains Symbol of Nationalist Pride” (Quebec Dispatch, Jan. 7), about the Quebec Nordiques:I am an Anglo Canadian Torontonian with some connection to the province of Quebec. My wife is from Montreal, and we visit her family there often. I love hockey and my Toronto Maple Leafs.I loathe the Montreal Canadiens, as I do the idea of separatism and the appalling anti-English bullying and lying of the politicians who support it. But I love the province, the people, the traditions, the cities, the beautiful countryside and wild terrain.I would love to see the Nordiques back in the National Hockey League. I want to see a resurgence in French Canadian hockey. It is probably the only thing I agree with Premier François Legault of Quebec about.I see it as good for Canadian culture, not just Québécois culture. Hockey unites us as a people.Nigel SmithToronto More
More from our inbox:Aligning Election Calendars to Increase TurnoutNatural Gas ExportsEmbracing the Semicolon Illustration by Frank Augugliaro/The New York Times. Photographs by Getty Images/iStockphotoTo the Editor:I was moved by “I Wrote Jokes About How Parenting Stinks. Then I Had a Kid,” by Karen Kicak (Opinion guest essay, Dec. 25).I have marveled at my child and couldn’t bring myself to complain about night waking or tantrums. I stayed quiet at birthday parties when parents lamented missing out on adult time and said they wanted to get away from their children. I felt so proud of my daughter and wanted to be around her all the time, yet I learned to push that part down.Ms. Kicak is right that when we downplay our parenting skills and our child’s greatness we rob ourselves of joy.Our self-effacing language may be an attempt to cover up how proud we actually are of our kids. We may also be preemptively self-critical to avoid feeling judged by other parents.These insecurities are getting in the way of celebrating together, and Ms. Kicak reminds us what we need to hear, that we’re “doing great.” She calls us to nudge the pendulum back so we can balance the real challenges of parenting with its tender and fleeting glow.Maybe we could connect more deeply if we allowed ourselves to communicate the parts of ourselves that love being a parent, too. I hope we can, before our little ones grow up.Elaine EllisSan FranciscoThe writer is a school social worker.To the Editor:Many thanks to Karen Kicak for her essay about parenting and positivity. When I was in sleep-deprived chaos with two small children, my neighbor, a public school art teacher and artist, asked how I was doing. I replied, “Surviving,” and she replied, “Ah, well, I think you are thriving.” That kind comment made me look at all the good things going on and made a world of difference.I too make only positive comments to parents. Thank you again for reminding people that kind and reassuring words go a long way in helping parents feel confident and supported by their community.Angel D’AndreaCincinnatiTo the Editor:I appreciate Karen Kicak’s piece about our culture’s overemphasis on the negatives of being a parent. It goes along with the focus on children’s “bad behaviors,” as people define them, which parents use to shame and ridicule their kids, even though they are still developing into who they will become. As if children are bad people all the time.Life is good and bad, easy and hard. So is motherhood. Why not note the deepest joys of this remarkable, intimate relationship alongside recognition of how hard it can be? We owe that to mothers. Admiring the love and care and pleasures and new identities that motherhood offers does not have to negate how hard it can get at times.I tell parents, “Enjoy this wonderful and challenging adventure of parenthood.” It is both of those things.Tovah P. KleinNew YorkThe writer is the director of the Barnard College Center for Toddler Development and the author of “How Toddlers Thrive.”Aligning Election Calendars to Increase Turnout Carl Iwasaki/Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “A New Law Will Help Bolster Voting in New York,” by Mara Gay (Opinion, Dec. 27):For every one person who votes in the mayoral general election, two vote in the presidential election. That’s a statistic that should concern anyone who cares about our local democracy.Last month, New York took a big step toward addressing this when Gov. Kathy Hochul signed legislation moving some local elections to even-numbered years. Aligning local races with federal or statewide races that typically see higher voter turnout will increase voter participation, diversify our electorate and save taxpayer dollars.Los Angeles held its first election in an even-numbered year in November 2022 and saw voter turnout nearly double. Other cities that have made the move have seen similar turnout gains. Research shows that this reform helps narrow participation gaps, particularly among young voters and in communities of color.Unfortunately, the New York State Legislature cannot shift all elections on its own, but lawmakers have committed to passing more comprehensive legislation through a constitutional amendment that moves local elections to even years across the entire state. That would include municipal elections in New York City.Good government groups must continue to advocate this reform, which would create an elections calendar that better serves voters and strengthens our local democracy.Betsy GotbaumNew YorkThe writer is the executive director of Citizens Union and a former New York City public advocate.Natural Gas ExportsA Venture Global liquefied natural gas facility on the Calcasieu Ship Channel in Cameron, La. The company wants to build a new export terminal at the site.Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Decision on Natural Gas Project Will Test Biden’s Energy Policy” (front page, Dec. 27):The Biden administration has a choice to make on climate policy: achieve its policy goal or continue to rubber-stamp gas export terminals. Rarely in politics is a choice so straightforward. In this case, it is.It’s simple. The fossil fuel industry is marketing liquefied natural gas (L.N.G.) as “natural.” It’s a “transition fuel,” they say. It’s not. It’s mostly methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases. The gas may emit less smoke and particulate matter than coal, but exporting it causes more greenhouse gas emissions.One of the latest reports on U.S. gas exports by Jeremy Symons says that “current U.S. L.N.G. exports are sufficient to meet Europe’s L.N.G. needs.” So why approve more plants? In the same report, it’s also revealed that if the administration approves all of the industry’s proposed terminals, U.S.-sourced L.N.G. emissions would be larger than the greenhouse gas emissions from the European Union.How can we add another emitter of greenhouse gases — one that would be a bigger contributor than Europe! — and meet the administration’s climate goals? We can’t.It’s time to embrace science, stop listening to the industry’s marketers and say “no, thank you!” to more gas.Russel HonoréBaton Rouge, La.The writer is the founder and head of the Green Army, an organization dedicated to finding solutions to pollution.Embracing the Semicolon Ben WisemanTo the Editor:Re “Our Semicolons, Ourselves,” by Frank Bruni (Opinion, Dec. 25):I feel like Frank Bruni when he writes about how he prattles on “about dangling participles and the like.” My students must also “hear a sad evangelist for a silly religion.”In more than three decades as a writing professor, I require my students to read my seven-page mini-stylebook, “Candy Schulman’s Crash Course in Style.” My mentor used to chastise me in red capital letters in the margins of my essays. “Between You and I?” he’d write; finally, I metamorphosed from “I” to “me.”Notice the semicolon I just used? I love them, like Abraham Lincoln, who respected this “useful little chap.”Kurt Vonnegut, however, felt differently. “Do not use semicolons,” he said. They represent “absolutely nothing. All they do is show you’ve been to college.”Until the day I retire, I will continue to teach my students that proper writing is not texting — where capitalization, punctuation and attention to spelling are discouraged.As colleges de-emphasize the humanities, I’ll still be preaching from the whiteboard of my classroom, drawing colons and semicolons to differentiate them, optimistically conveying my joy for proper grammar. Between you and me, I’m keeping the faith.Candy SchulmanNew YorkThe writer is a part-time associate writing professor at The New School. More
