3 ms·
Externalities are already priced in using existing NEPA/CEQA/environmental legislation, some would say absurdly highly. Almost everyone who advocates for infill
by Karrot_Kream 4y ago
Externalities are already priced in using existing NEPA/CEQA/environmental legislation, some would say absurdly highly. Almost everyone who advocates for infill development along with continued exurban development is also a fan of accounting for externalities while building. There's plenty of the US where there's low productivity grasslands where it's fine to build but as you say there are also several delicate ecologies out there that need preserving.
The existing regulatory landscape already accounts for this in many places. That's what California's CEQA is all about. I'm a fan of infill development along with available exurbs but I'm also a fan of taxing or blocking externalities and if you feel there's a gap where you live, I highly recommend lobbying your local government to add legislation around curtailing externalities.
- ericmay 4y agoThe negative externalities aren’t priced in. That’s just a simple fact. If they were then gas would be $20+ per gallon and we wouldn’t have most of the population suffering from obesity. Cities like Columbus wouldn’t have 200+ acres of surface parking lots (most American cities suffer from the same problem). You can tell that the externalities aren’t priced in because the problems they cause continue to stay the same or get worse (obesity, coral reefs dying, car crashes killing kids and stuff).
- Karrot_Kream 4y agoThen go and advocate for that if you want that to happen. As someone who does advocate, I think pricing externalities is infinitely better than how CEQA works but CEQA is much more palatable to the electorate than pricing externalities.