I’m afraid you were only one for three in your Jan. 19 editorial. Yes, you were right to fault South Portland’s approval process for a propane distribution hub (“South Portland owes gas company a fair process”). Yet that focus on the process is way too shortsighted.

You drastically underestimate the “duty to consider all legitimate health and safety concerns.” The “scaled-back” proposal of a 24,000-gallon tank “with several rail tank cars … attached to trains going to other parts of the state” doesn’t provide protection for our citizens. Have you already forgotten the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster?

Your priorities are woefully misguided. You worry that “neighborhood concerns are trumping regional needs.” But are you willing to let regional needs trash the environment?

The subtitle was “Too many Mainers depend on a reliable supply of propane for this project to be scuttled.” Instead, “Too many Mainers don’t depend on renewable resources” would be a good series for you to run.

How will future history textbooks describe the country’s overreliance on polluting, nonrenewable energy sources? How will those textbooks view our reluctance to wage an all-out war on oil, coal, gas and nuclear dependence instead of a concerted technological thrust on alternative sources?

Why don’t you shine a spotlight on the need for a new Manhattan Project – one that would yield productive, rather than destructive, results? Have you already forgotten your Jan. 1 Letter from the Publisher proclamation, “We also strive to be a force for good … and we shine a spotlight on the issues that demand attention”?

So even if you are right about the current process, you have forsaken both protection and priorities.

Mike Berkowitz

Saco