Re: “Sea-Tac is adapting, but we need a new airport” [March 30, Opinion]:
In response to the opinion that we need a new airport, it should be pointed out that “rising air-travel demand” is a way of life available to only a small percentage of the population. The argument that “our region’s bottom line” supports a much larger economy benefiting all just doesn’t hold water when the pollution costs and noise disruption are considered from the surrounding airport communities, as noted in the recent Seattle Times article reporting on the correlation between redlining and air pollution [“New maps show strong correlation between redlined places in Seattle and worse air quality,” March 29, Local News].
The bottom line should also include the subsidized fares and tax dollars we all pay for with the state and federal support of the private aviation industry, never mind the free pass for the huge carbon footprint of each flight we all pay for with climate devastation.
The benefit for the few, who continue to create a much larger negative environmental impact than the general community, happens at the expense of the lives and livelihoods of the many. If we believe that everyone should have the opportunity to breathe clean air and lead healthy lives, we need to create and promote new modes of clean-energy travel and reduce the old fossil-fuel burning ones now.
Anne Kroeker, Des Moines