“2026 is just the beginning. It will inevitably get worse. It will get worse and worse and worse to the point where, I’m afraid, we’ll be passing the limits of adaptability,” said Johan Rockstrom, a Swedish scientist who is director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.
Extreme weather has been lashing many parts of the world, including the United States, yet President Donald Trump calls climate change a hoax as he hauls in millions of dollars in political contributions from oil interests.
For over four decades, it has been the consensus of climate scientists — including climate scientists employed by oil companies — that burning fossil fuels is causing a greenhouse effect that is warming our planet and causing more extreme weather. The scientists’ predictions over these four decades have proved to be accurate. The predictions of the deniers and minimizers have proved to be wrong.
China has surged to a wide lead in the production of solar panels, batteries and electric vehicles, increasing its jobs, wealth, prestige and influence.
In contrast, Trump promotes fossil fuels and blocks clean-energy solar and wind projects, even though clean energy with battery storage is less expensive, especially when fossil fuels’ health-threatening pollution and contribution to climate change and its damage are considered.
Trump as a candidate said he would work for lower prices. He came out with tariffs. He said he would release the Jeffrey Epstein files. He fought the release. He said he would avoid wars. He attacked Iran. He repeatedly said the war would be over soon. No end is in sight.
Can he be believed on climate change or anything else?
— Richard Barsanti, Western Springs
We need a carbon tax
Thanks for the article “Poll shows weather reshaping daily life” (in print Aug. 7). It spotlights how our warming climate is impacting everyday Americans. Hotter days mean more bad-air days for those of us with breathing issues. Hotter days can mean productivity loss and heat-related health risks for outdoor workers. Also, add to that tally here in the Chicago area more flooding from the growing incidence of extreme rain events.
These changes, along with increased mega-fires, longer-lasting droughts and sunny-day coastal flooding, are mostly the result of a warming climate caused by burning fossil fuels. And guess who pays nothing for the economic and health harms caused by this warming? Fossil fuel producers that are earning record profits.
It’s time to consider placing a fee or tax on fossil fuel companies for the harm caused by burning their products. But we should only do that if the fee collected is returned to households as a dividend check to offset rising fuel prices. The net result would help speed the transition to cleaner, less-polluting energy.
Meanwhile, these producers continue to use our skies as a trashcan without penalty for the harmful emissions generated from their fossil fuel sales — polluting our air, contributing to climate instability and negatively impacting our health.
— Andrew Panelli, Homer Glen
Stop flow of plastic pellets
In response to the article “Illinois cracks down on ‘nurdles’” (Aug. 11), I felt compelled to note that while the signing of this landmark bill represents a significant step forward in combating plastic pollution in the Great Lakes region, it alone is insufficient.
I have spent the last two months working on the campaign to implement the Plastic Pellet Free Waters Act (HB3278), which would go an additional step further than classification by upgrading Illinois’ anti-pellet-pollution measures to a zero-discharge policy. This would impose meaningful penalties on companies that continue to engage in the dumping of pellets.
This dumping, which currently goes unregulated at the federal and state level in Illinois, not only adds plastics to our waterways, ecosystems and drinking water sources but also chemicals such as mercury, lead and DDT, with which pellets often become contaminated prior to their unrestricted release into our natural world. It is cheaper for companies to take the easy way out rather than cleaning, recycling and reusing these pellets.
With the lack of repercussions they face for it, that is exactly what they do.
The Plastic Pellet Free Waters Act, which has already passed the Illinois House, is a commonsense measure that would protect our fresh water, our wildlife and our health.
I urge Illinois state senators to sign on to the Plastic Pellet Free Waters Act in the coming legislative session.
— Henry Vrtis, Evanston
Social Security revelations
In Chicago, the racial life-expectancy gap is longer than the entire Social Security claiming window.
More Top Picks Best Sensory Swings For Autism
I did not first confront that disparity in a government report. I saw its outline one client at a time.
Before advising someone on when to claim Social Security, I use a longevity analysis tool. It weighs health, family history, chronic illness, lifestyle and work history. It does not predict death. It helps clients see a likely retirement horizon: how many years Social Security may need to provide income.
As I worked with Chicago clients, a pattern emerged. The tool often projected shorter horizons for my Black clients than for my white clients. My local sample was far too small to prove anything. Still, the pattern troubled me.
Then I read in June that Chicago’s overall life expectancy had reached an all-time high of 79.5 years. That was encouraging. But inside that average was a profound divide: 73.3 years for Black Chicagoans and 82.7 years for non-Black Chicagoans — a gap of 9.4 years.
What I had observed one client at a time now appeared in the city’s data.
The financial significance is hard to miss. Americans can claim Social Security at 62 or wait until 70 for their largest monthly benefit. That decision window spans eight years. Chicago’s racial longevity gap is longer.
Yet Chicagoans approaching retirement routinely hear the same financial commandment: Wait until 70.
For many, waiting is wise. A larger monthly check can protect against outliving one’s savings. But “always wait” is not a strategy. It is a slogan. Personal finance loves a universal rule almost as much as Chicago loves arguing about where the Bears’ next stadium should be built.
The right claiming age depends on health, longevity, savings, employment, family circumstances and survivor protection. Race should never dictate the decision. Neither should a ZIP code. But we cannot pretend every Chicagoan faces the same future.
Before telling someone to forfeit years of checks while waiting for a larger one, we should ask a more human question: What does that person’s horizon actually look like?
— Ray R. Harris, founder and president, Social Security Claiming Experts, Chicago
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].