This is in reaction to Roger King's July 3 Perspective, ``GOP has right idea: conservation'' [Page 12].
The bottom line of conservation is energy. Its use is the difference between developed and undeveloped nations. It is what keeps our astronauts alive in space, and all of us alive on planet Earth. It is power to pump and purify.
About 90 percent of all our fossilized energy is used as fuel. The other 10 percent gives us all our petrochemicals and plastics. But plastics, after serving a useful purpose, remain 100 percent energy.
Which makes more sense - to expend more energy on it to re-collect and re-process it, or simply allow it to join the first 90 percent? And what other material even gives us this choice?
Stanley F. Moat
Contour Packaging Corp.
Philadelphia
