Dan R. Brouillette of Torridon Group is correct that Illinois is at an energy crossroads (“Illinois is at an energy crossroads, and time is running out,” May 26).

For years, we’ve been sounding the alarm on the energy supply crisis, and lawmakers in Springfield have been responding by advancing solutions that build new energy sources and optimize existing energy sources.

Illinois is fortunate to have leaders who understand energy and have established our state as a predictable energy market, attracting more than $12 billion in investments in Illinois. Today’s world is changing fast with data centers and other factors driving energy demand to record-breaking levels, following decades of relatively flat demand. To meet this demand, we must build more new energy, and quickly.

This problem is not unique to Illinois. Across the country, electricity bills are rising rapidly as energy markets adjust to this sudden, extreme demand surge. The Illinois General Assembly passed the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability (CRGA) Act last fall to address the state’s energy crisis and build new energy supply, in order to prioritize speed and affordability.

Fossil fuel power plants are among the most expensive and volatile resources on the grid. Illinois’ existing fossil facilities are aging, require continuous maintenance and face fluctuating fuel costs; new fossil plants are among the slowest and most expensive forms of energy to build. Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy+ shows that natural gas combined-cycle plants cost $48 to $107 per megawatt-hour, whereas utility-scale solar projects range from $38 to $78 per megawatt-hour. Additionally, delaying the planned closures of Illinois’ existing fossil fuel plants would cost taxpayers $161 million annually, one of the highest costs in the nation. Conversely, solar and storage can be brought online in just two to three years, as opposed to the seven-plus years that fossil fuel and nuclear power plants require.

What we are experiencing is unprecedented, and this level of increased energy demand is something we have not seen in decades. We are at a pivotal moment, with significant changes happening across the energy sector, and we must continue adapting to meet the challenge.

Illinois lawmakers had a choice: Pursue slower, higher-cost solutions that would harm consumers and the environment or continue investing in fast, affordable and economy-boosting energy resources. By passing CRGA to address the energy affordability crisis, Illinois leaders made the right choice for our state.

— Lesley McCain, executive director, Illinois Solar Energy & Storage Association

Renters’ right after assault

Rebecca Johnson’s recent article “Chicago woman sues luxury residential managers for not allowing her to break lease after an alleged assault” (May 12) fails to mention a critical piece of legislation that every renter in our state should know: the Illinois Safe Homes Act.

Under this law, a tenant who is sexually assaulted at their rented home has the right to end their lease within 60 days of the crime. The procedure is simple, requiring at least three days of written notice to the landlord and one form of supporting evidence, such as a medical, court or police record. Had the tenant in the article been aware of this right, she could have broken her lease without penalty, sparing her the trauma of living at the scene of the crime and the burden of ongoing litigation.

Now, every Illinois lease is required to include a “Summary of Rights for Safer Homes” as its very first page. This summary explains that a survivor has the right to end a lease early if there is a credible, imminent threat of domestic or sexual violence, or if sexual violence has occurred at the rented home in the prior 60 days. A survivor may also be able to obtain a lock change at the rented home if needed to prevent further domestic or sexual violence.

As an attorney at Ascend Justice, a Chicago legal aid agency that serves survivors of domestic
and sexual violence, I have helped many survivors exercise their rights under the Safe Homes Act. By failing to mention this law, the article inadvertently creates the impression that renters are at the mercy of their landlords when they experience domestic violence or sexual assault.

Survivors already face immense hurdles when seeking safety and justice. Public reporting should empower them by highlighting available legal protections.

— Elizabeth Yoo, senior attorney, Ascend Justice, Chicago

Don’t forget Rockford airport

A May 11 editorial asks whether Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport is becoming a better bet than O’Hare International Airport (“Is Milwaukee Mitchell International Airport a better bet than Chicago O’Hare? A new international terminal might up the ante”). It is a fair question. Travelers want options, and the Chicago region needs more than one way to ease pressure on O’Hare.

But the conversation should not overlook an Illinois airport that is already helping serve that role.

Chicago Rockford International Airport (RFD) is not a proposal or a future concept. It is an operating airport with room to grow, uncongested operations, highway access, cargo infrastructure and a record of serving the broader Chicago market.

For passengers, RFD offers affordable parking, shorter lines, easier access and less stress. That matters for families across northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin. Anyone who has watched a simple trip become complicated before even reaching the gate understands why.

The larger point, though, is cargo. O’Hare will remain one of the world’s most important aviation gateways. But the region’s freight network should not rely on one airport to absorb every pressure point. RFD already supports major cargo operations.

Illinois does not need to create a cargo-focused airport in Peotone when it already has one in Rockford. The state should make full use of the cargo airport that is already moving freight, supporting logistics companies and serving Illinois’ economy.

Milwaukee Mitchell may well become a stronger passenger alternative to O’Hare. Good. More choices help travelers. But if the question is how Illinois strengthens aviation capacity, relieves pressure on O’Hare and supports long-term cargo growth, Rockford belongs in that conversation.

Chicago’s third airport is already operating at RFD.

— Zachary D. Oakley, executive director, Chicago Rockford International Airport

Incentivize using the CTA

From 1960 to 1962, I rode the CTA every school day from Devon and Cicero avenues to high school near Chicago Avenue and State Street. I was a reasonably happy CTA and Metra rider on most days from 1971 (when I got out of the Army) until around 2010 — except for a dozen years when I commuted by bicycle two or three times a week from Evanston to the Loop. I was almost righteous when I bragged about going from Sunday to Friday without touching a car. (The weekends, with music lessons, soccer games, etc., were quite different.)

But despite well over 50 years of consistent use of public transportation, it never occurred to me that I could tell other people that they shouldn’t drive a car. I’m an environmentalist and a Democrat, but that’s too much.

In a letter (“Incentivize riding CTA buses,” May 20), Courtney Cobbs of Better Streets Chicago excoriates Mayor Brandon Johnson for failing to create dedicated bus lanes and change the city’s traffic signals to always favor buses. Her letter fails to mention that these steps would inconvenience more people than they would help — the inconvenienced people being those who have voted with their wallets to buy cars and drive them. These are people who didn’t choose, as she did, to move “to Chicago to live car-free.”

Other writers beat the drum for ever-more bike lanes, at the expense of traffic lanes or parking. Again, it’s “listen up people: Live the way I think you should.” Result: Watch the frustration as the drivers on North Clark Street are forced to a single lane by bike lanes, which are often empty.

If you want more people to ride public transit, so that they would eventually love more pro-transit spending, the easy start would be to make it safer, cleaner and quieter. I’d love to go back.

— Vincent Flood, Evanston

State of response to Ebola

Ebola is a very deadly disease. From 2013 to 2016, there were more than 28,600 identified cases in West Africa, and more than 10,000 of people infected died from this virus.

My son-in-law joined many courageous others who went to West African countries such as Mali to fight this deadly threat during this period. He and many others were working with the now-discontinued United States Agency for International Development. Eleven cases of Ebola were reported in the United States.

Who will be organized enough for us to send to Africa this time? Who will protect us and others from this deadly threat?

How does the current administration in the White House plan to protect us after eliminating our best defense?

— Fred Schein, Chicago 

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.