To the editor: In your article about the looming threat of climate change to California’s piers, you quoted a researcher who pointed out, “There are limited resources, and we have to think strategically about what are we going to protect?” This approach must face the harsh truth: while millions are treating climate change with the seriousness it demands, billions remain indifferent.
People have been advised to cut down on fossil fuel usage, but success in this relatively straightforward task has been lacking. This failure hardly inspires confidence that we’ll manage other, more complex challenges related to climate change.
Gregg Ferry, Carlsbad
…
To the editor: The storm-driven destruction of California’s piers, intensified by climate change, begs the question—do we truly need these piers? Initially built for commercial shipping, piers have now become spots for public enjoyment. But with nature’s relentless fury and public money continuously funneled into rebuilding these structures, why persist in maintaining them at all?
Bob Ladendorf, Los Angeles
…
To the editor: The loss of California’s iconic piers might not seem significant to some when considering the planet’s grander issues. Yet, it acts as a harbinger of our precarious future if we fail to curb the Earth’s warming, which is largely driven by our relentless consumption of fossil fuels.
The scientific consensus is irrefutable about the dangers of further warming. Recent hurricanes, Helene and Milton, amped up by climate change, clearly illustrate the stakes.
If you haven’t yet been directly affected by climate change, don’t get complacent—it poses a threat to you, your children, and your grandchildren.
We need voters, regardless of political affiliation, to actively urge their congressional representatives to take the decisive actions necessary to combat climate change. It’s crucial that these representatives heed their constituents’ calls.
Jack Holtzman and Irwin Rubenstein, San Diego
