Editorial: European and US trade relations

  The Editorial that I found on the Dallas Morning News stuck out to me right away. President Obama announced in his State of the Union address that he plans to create a trade treaty with the countries in the European Union. This was a bit of a surprise due to the fact that the President Obama has not focused on foreign trade during his last term.

    A trade relationship with Europe would benefit both the US and Europe. The writer explains that if our trading relationship expanded it would result in lower tariffs and duties for American and Texan companies. This idea of trading with Europe is still premature, if the US decided to go through with it, there would be extensive negotiation, especially on labor laws and environmental standards, which are more lenient here.

   The writer compares President Obama to presidents that have taken actions that surprised and defied what the people believed to be in the country’s best interest. For example Reagan’s relationship with communist Gorbachev during the Cold War and Nixon’s relationship with China. This could potentially be Obama’s legacy.

    I think overall the author did a good job in reviewing this idea, he provided information of what the concept is, the benefits of it and brought up some issues that will need to be resolved if this plan moves forward. I appreciated his reference to past presidents and the correlation between their foreign relationships to this current one.

The End of Big Brown

   The Big Brown power plant in East Texas is one of the nation's oldest and dirtiest. It has been operating since the 1970s, but has failed to keep up with new, green technology. Coal combustion produces mercury and other pollutants that endangers the lives and health of inhabitants of surrounding areas. Mercury is known for having effects as severe as brain damage, not to mention the contribution to climate change and ozone.

  The Sierra Club, an environmental organization responsible for the actions taken against this power plant has categorized it as a top priority case. The group has added mailings, phone calls, door-to-door advocacy, and other means to alert residents and policy makers of Dallas, the company's biggest client, about the risks. Luminant, the company responsible for this, and several other mercury emitting power plants, accounts for up to 2% of Dallas' ozone. The company has fired back, claiming they have already spent $270 million on environmental controls, and plan to spend $500 million more from 2013 to 2017. Environmentalist worry that this is not enough, and that the company does not have the means to do what it is promising. Cleaning technology is available, in this case a sulfur-dioxide scrubber is the solution, simple but expensive.

   Environmentalists agree that they cant shut down Big Brown overnight, the plant is accountable for 8% of Texas' energy. The goal is to replace it with renewable energy sources like wind and solar power over the next five years. Natural gas is also a competitor, with low prices and less harmful effects on the environment. Is this realistic? Probably not, but efforts like this from the Sierra Club are necessary to make sure companies are following environmental regulations. It is important that the people know where their energy is coming from and that they are conscious this could be harming future generations.