We know how to reduce emissions. We only need the political will. We can regulate carbon pollution, even forbid further exploration or production of fossil fuels. We could collect an increasing fee on every ton of carbon pollution produced by the industry so that soon these fuels would be so expensive, consumers and businesses would choose alternatives.

The Trump administration released a dire climate report on Black Friday, apparently hoping it would get scant attention as Americans focused on holiday shopping ( “US warns of dire climate risks,” Page One, Nov. 24). Despite the deception, we mustn’t miss the recurring message of yet another frightening climate report. That is, to avert the worst of climate change, we must reduce emissions as soon as possible.

We can avert worst of climate change — we only need the will to do so


The transition to a clean energy economy could be hastened and enhanced by returning all revenues to American households so that we may cope with the increased energy costs, protect our economy, and preserve a livable climate.

Bob Taylor

Newport Beach, Calif.

With Trump in power, the implications are alarming

The findings of the congressionally mandated report on climate change, which are firmly rooted in consensus science, will do little to influence President Trump and the interests he represents.

The survey is a reminder that Trump, as the world’s most famous and powerful denier of climate science, refuses to accept the risks his policies pose.

Without efforts to tackle global warming, implications for even near-term future generations are alarming.

Responsible leadership would acknowledge that politics has no role in the sound decision-making required to address the urgency of this crisis. Hopefully, such leadership will emerge before time runs out.

Roger Hirschberg

Bondville, Vt.

Look to British Columbia’s carbon tax effort for motivation

Research shows that we are moved more by stories than data when being motivated to act on climate change. The latest National Climate Assessment is full of dire data, and it’s easy to feel overwhelmed and paralyzed by its implications. So here’s a story to consider: In 2008, British Columbia enacted a revenue-neutral tax on carbon. Between 2007 and 2015, the results were twofold: Its economy grew 17 percent (during a period that included the Great Recession), and greenhouse gas emissions fell by almost 5 percent.


That’s a story to motivate us all.

Debora Hoffman

Belmont

The dire conditions projected for 2035 are closer than we think

Re “Northeast faces wide range of woes, report states” (Page 11, Nov. 24): In 2035, my 4-year-old grandson will be 21. All of our 4-year-old loved ones will be 21. Imagine the world they will face as young adults here in the Northeast, as we lead much of the rest of the globe in temperature rise. According to the National Climate Assessment, this temperature rise is “expected to lead to substantially more premature deaths, hospital admissions, and emergency department visits across the Northeast.” That’s in addition to vast infrastructure damage and displaced populations from more severe storms and flooding.

Boston should be credited with building a resiliency plan, but we need much more than that. We need Governor Charlie Baker to stop supporting new fossil fuel infrastructure. We need Speaker Robert DeLeo and the Massachusetts House to support the broad energy legislation passed by the Massachusetts Senate, which supports carbon pricing, emissions reduction goals, and renewable energy projects.

Our 4-year-olds cannot wait until 2035; they need action from our leaders right now.

Michele Vitti

Arlington

We can say it’s not too late, but then again, maybe it is

Indira A. R. Lakshmanan writes (“Mr. Trump, climate change is real,” Opinion, Nov. 29) that it is not too late to avert catastrophe due to global warming. As she puts it, “We need to impose strict limits on emissions, adapt farming, and prepare for the toll of extreme weather on housing, public health, and overstressed roads, bridges, and sewers.”


However, given that everything on that list must be accomplished to avoid problems, and that nothing actually seems to be happening along those lines, the only reasonable conclusion is that we face a dystopian future in which, as Lakshmanan notes earlier in her piece, we will experience “floods, drought, extreme heat, and rising ocean levels that will devastate hundreds of millions of people, depleting fisheries and agriculture, eradicating the ocean’s coral, destroying habitats for insects vital to pollination of crops, and fueling food shortages and deadly extreme weather events.”

Why mince words? Why not spell out the most probable effect of our current practices? Failure to do so may appear hopeful, but it’s closer to delusional.

William Vaughan Jr.

Chebeague Island, Maine

Our immigration problems are just beginning

America’s immigration problems — if indeed they exist outside the sphere of clinical xenophobia — will not be solved at the border, not even if we could trade our present version of government for one both rational and humane. So long as we continue frenetically destroying the global climate balance, untold numbers of poor people will be moving desperately in search of new homes.

Scott Hartley

Fairfield, Iowa