An Aug. 14 contributor to the Readers' Forum was under the delusion that opening up all U.S. territory and territorial waters to exploration can make us "independent from foreign oil." Unfortunately, how much oil is out there depends on geology and how quickly it can be pumped depends on physics.
In 1956, M. King Hubbert used mathematical logic to predict that oil production in the United States would peak about 1970 and that, thereafter, domestic production would decline. He was right. President Ronald Reagan gave oil companies free rein to drill our way to energy independence. They failed. Domestic production continued to decline despite the most vigorous exploration effort this nation has ever experienced, before or since.
A decade ago, columnist Gwynne Dyer interviewed petroleum geologist Craig Hatfield, who predicted global production would peak about 2008. Whether Mr. Hatfield was correct remains to be seen. However, recent price hikes mean that demand now exceeds supply.
Crediting a recent (and no doubt temporary) modest retreat in gasoline prices to a presidential announcement ending a federal ban on offshore drilling is preposterous. Oil futures markets deal with delivery during the coming months (check the fine print on commodities price lists). It will take years for new offshore fields to be discovered and produce oil in significant quantities, and anyone who makes money investing in oil knows that.
Exploratory drilling off our East Coast during the 1970s found some natural gas but no strong evidence of significant oil. We need to beware of any pundit or politician who claims that we can drill our way to energy independence. He has geology, physics, history, and logic stacked against him.
Donald J. Stierman
Associate Professor of Geophysics
University of Toledo
Razing UW building is correct decision
The United Way of Greater Toledo changes lives by uniting caring people and resources to build stronger communities. For the last 30 years, I have observed this organization work tirelessly to help the people in our communities who are in need. We are blessed to have a staff of committed associates and a pool of volunteers who truly care.
The recent decision of the United Way board of trustees to construct a new building on the existing site is one more example of committed people doing the right thing.
Countless hours of study went into evaluating the facts and options. A new building task force was formed in early 2007. This group of community leaders, all serving in a volunteer capacity, spent over a year evaluating current options with experts in their field. The final report was presented to the board in July with a unanimous vote to move forward on Aug. 6.
Would we have liked to save the unique structure we fondly refer to as the Stranahan building? Certainly, who wouldn't? Could we justify the $10 million price tag for renovations for the 39-year-old building versus the $6.6 million to build a new, energy-efficient building and create a downtown park? No, it simply is not the right thing to do.
Our job as volunteers is to support the United Way's core mission - taking care of people in need. We must be fiscally responsible and stay focused on our mission. There is no question the recent decision was a difficult one, but it was the right one.
Jani Miller
Board member
United Way of Greater Toledo
Holland
Structure unfixable at 40? That's odd
Am I the only one struck by the timing of two stories in the Aug. 10 edition of The Blade? In one about historic buildings in Richmond, Va., a brewery owner mentioned his building was built in 1872 and the one next door was built in 1866.
The same day we also read about the plan to demolish the Stranahan building because that 40-year-old building needs too much work. Maybe someone should place a call to Richmond.
Jim Perlman
Sylvania
Goal is to save lives, not One Stranahan
I have worked in United Way's building for 14 years - five years as the director of a tenant agency and nine years as an employee of United Way. The Community Services Building at One Stranahan Square is a beautiful building from the outside.
I would oppose the construction of a new building for United Way and work hard to save this building if:
1) The current building could be rehabbed at a reasonable cost.
2) Nonprofits could afford the rehabbed space.
3) The original experiment of shared space and shared services for nonprofit organizations had worked well.
I abhor that our society wants to throw things away - relationships, buildings, marriages, children, neighborhoods, clothing, etc. - because new and shiny is often perceived as better. There are, however, too many "ifs" listed above, and the trade-off is too great.
The Stranahan family, the donors of the grounds and building, stated it supports a decision that is in the best interest of United Way. This venerable family endorses the plan for new construction and demolition of the current structure.
While I appreciate the history and the uniqueness of this building, the best interests of the community are served through downsizing our space. No doubt, the new building will not have the high profile, the distinctive design, and prestige of the current one. But the United Way is not about high profile and prestige. It is about advancing the common good. It is about stewardship over donors' gifts. When considering the return on investment in the long run, saving lives is more important than saving buildings.
Audrey Weis-Maag
Meadowvale Drive
Building was never a Toledo landmark
Since when is the Community Services Building a landmark, as it was called in The Blade's Aug. 8 story? Sure, the building is interesting looking and has served the needs of the community over the years, but it is not a landmark or a historic building.
The organization is what we should be looking to preserve, not the building. The United Way has served our community for 90 years. It has improved the quality of life for all of us. It is our turn to help United Way by supporting its efforts to become an even more financially responsible organization.
Nick Hammond
Kylemore Road
United Way board is to be commended
I am surprised by the community's response to United Way's efforts at becoming more fiscally responsible. The organization wants to build a new building without the use of program dollars. There have been many parties involved in researching this endeavor and they should be commended for making this tough decision. This is not a decision that was made overnight.
I find it comical that the United Way is being chastised for "ruining the skyline of Toledo." I didn't think the building was that tall. The fact remains that the building is too costly to maintain and operate. They have researched and analyzed the costs of renovating and renting space elsewhere. And they are choosing to invest dollars into the community rather than into the escalating operating costs of a deteriorating building.
I think this is another attempt for everyone to play "armchair quarterback" when those parties don't even know all of the facts. This is a great milestone for the United Way and I think it is a new chapter in helping those individuals and organizations in our community that are in need of assistance. After all, isn't that what it is all about?
I commend the United Way of Greater Toledo's board of trustees for making the unpopular but necessary decision to build.
Jim Walrod
Wallwerth Drive
Stop fighting United Way
Why does Mayor Carty Finkbeiner think he knows what is best for United Way? The mayor touts economic growth and keeping downtown alive but he is not giving United Way a single reason to stay downtown.
Stop fighting United Way's efforts to build a new building and start focusing on the fact that United Way is choosing to stay downtown.
Edward Hunt
Kylemore Road
