Letters, Aug. 23

Solar solutions

Re: China races to build world’s largest solar farm to meet emissions targets (Aug. 22).

We hear about China building solar farms, the latest of which will be the world’s largest, the size of Chicago.

And, China installed more solar capacity in the first six months of the year, than the U.S.’s entire capacity as of the end of 2024. It’s increase this year in green power will outpace its electricity needs. Lastly, their electric-production represents 70 per cent of the global total and their EVs are affordable through subsidies.

Yes, they are the biggest carbon-emitters but they are doing something about it. In Canada, our two main political parties are fighting over who will be the oil pipeline champion while our country burns.

J. Arnold

Winnipeg

Shameful transit situation

Mayor Scott Gillingham and his underlings should be ashamed of themselves —absolutely ashamed of themselves — for this disastrous and dangerous transit system they have unleashed upon us.

What used to be a 12-minute walk to the bus has now turned into an 18-minute walk, with me having to jaywalk across McPhillips in the middle of rush hour, only because they chose to eliminate stops for no reason.

I take the No. 28 every morning, and I see people running across Leila in the middle of rush hour to catch their connection to St. Vital. It’s only a matter of time before someone gets seriously hurt or worse. Certain places in the city are now completely inaccessible by Winnipeg Transit.

I thought the whole point of this exercise was more frequent and reliable transit, so why are buses arriving packed full of people?

What’s disappointing is the city’s obnoxious attitude toward our complaints. Their response, literally, is: “Get used to it.” Well, Gillingham and company better get used to being unemployed once he is thrown out of office in a landslide.

Life is already hard enough for people who rely on transit to get around — Gillingham and company just made it a whole lot harder, and it’s not even winter yet.

Nehal Hasan

Winnipeg

Regulation issue

Re: The connection between wildfires, animal agriculture (Think Tank, Aug. 21)

Summer is the time we all like to barbecue. It’s about gathering with friends, enjoying the outdoors, and making memories. Turning that into a guilt trip over eating a burger or a steak at the lake like Jessica Scott-Reid does doesn’t bring us closer to solving climate change, it just leaves people disillusioned.

The truth is, individual consumer activism has been pushed for decades — don’t drive, don’t fly, don’t eat meat, buy different products — and yet it has had little to no effect on the climate. Wildfires and emissions haven’t magically gone away, they’ve gotten far worse. That’s because these are systemic issues tied to energy, forestry, land management, and of course how the government regulates all of these, not whether you had ribs last weekend.

What actually makes a difference is how and where we source our food. Buying meat from local farmers and our neighbourhood butcher supports Manitoba families, keeps money in our communities, and cuts down on long-distance shipping. Local producers often manage their land responsibly, rotating pastures and maintaining healthier soils — something a processed soy patty shipped halfway across the world can’t claim.

If some people don’t want to eat meat, that’s their choice. Meanwhile, it’s more meat for the rest of us: on the grill, from our local butcher, and enjoyed the way summer in Manitoba was meant to be.

Kenneth Ingram

Winnipeg

Inescapable reality

Re: The connection between wildfires, animal agriculture (Think Tank, Aug. 21)

In highlighting the links between animal agriculture and wildfires, Jessica Scott-Reid’s insightful article hints at an inescapable reality that I think needs to be made explicit: The chickens have come home to roost for animal agriculture. In other words, it has helped to create the very conditions that now undermine it.

Look no further than the severe drought currently devastating the livestock industry in Manitoba. As Scott-Reid points out, climate change and deforestation — which animal agriculture has contributed significantly to — are exacerbating droughts, parching our landscapes.

Things will continue to get worse as long as this sector continues in business-as-usual fashion. Particularly concerning right now is the planned development of two mega-dairy operations just south of the border. With over 37,000 cows combined, these projects in North Dakota would be disastrous not only for the animals but for our climate – not to mention the Lake Winnipeg watershed. The very least we could do as a society is establish a moratorium on any new meat or dairy operations as we work toward a largely plant-based future.

Tracy Groenewegen

Winnipeg

What it means to be literate

Re: Redefining what it means to be literate (Think Tank, Aug. 21)

In Clark’s article, literacy is defined as anything and everything. Reading and writing are described as necessary but insufficient to be literate, and various illiteracies among individuals who can read are highlighted.

If only Clark could get past all the curricular jargon and recognize that the alphabet is missing from the curriculum. Some emotional literacy might also go a long way in supporting the large number of children with dyslexia who struggle with reading and their families, and the teachers tasked with their instruction — which is why literacy was in the news.

The dyslexia community isn’t interested in academic musings about literacy. We need evidence-based reading instruction for our children, we need teachers trained to provide it, and we need educational leaders to facilitate this. We know that reading skills don’t automatically lead to various other types of literacy – if it did, presumably, the education sector would already be literate in reading instruction.

Clark’s attempt to redefine literacy to minimize reading in the context of the Manitoba Human Rights Commission Right to Read investigation can only be described as insensitive.

Natalie Riediger

Winnipeg

I’m not sure, but I think the overarching objective of the opinion piece is to persuade us to define and think of literacy and being literate as being something beyond learning and knowing how to read and write, as we have traditionally thought of them.

OK, but let’s not cause, even implicitly, reading and writing to lose their historically vaunted place. Historically, as the piece points out, literary and being literate has been about reading and writing, and I think it should primarily remain so for the following reasons. First, these are the core and fundamental life coping and enhancing competencies and skills without which one will struggle to do other things, including being a critical thinker and creative.

Second, let’s not conflate and mix things up till it’s difficult to know what we’re really talking about. For example, being digitally competent and proficient is important in this world, and will be even more so in the future, but it should not be seen nor portrayed as being the same as (nor as important as) being able to read and write.

In my opinion, educators too often walk away from the tried and true in pursuit of the next best thing. Let’s not do that, especially with something as fundamentally important as being literate.

Gerald Farthing

Winnipeg