3 ms·
The right to pollute should never be granted in perpetuity. If anything, it should be a recurring cost that increases or decreases based on the how much polluti
by francisofascii 5y ago
The right to pollute should never be granted in perpetuity. If anything, it should be a recurring cost that increases or decreases based on the how much polluting is occurring. That way the markets work in incentivizing less polluting.
- LorenPechtel 5y agoYup. For the most part I would like to see current pollution regulations tossed wholesale. Instead, put a price tag on each pollutant. The charge is applied at the point in the supply chain where the pollutant is created or extracted and is rebated to anyone who destroys the pollutant (although they may be charged for other pollutants created in the process.) Think of the oft-proposed carbon tax, just much, much broader.
- drawqrtz 5y agoIn an ideal world this would be a great solution, but on earth I think this would invite a whole host of corruption, similar to the carbon offset trading. Not combating the problem but making everyone richer.
- boringg 5y agoThis is interesting and far too progressive for any of the cities to regulate at this time (or at any point in the past). This does sound like the right way to permit new industrial areas / processes. Though I imagine it might be difficult to pull off. Grandfathered industries would have such a huge advantage.