Jim wrote: 
 
> I have a bit of a problem with this idea that environmentalism and 
> economics are mortal enemies. There has to be some middle ground. 
 
In fact, in the long run, environmentalism makes good business sense. The 
problem is that so many businesses in this country don't take the long run into 
account - next week, next month, maybe next year, but five years from now? WTF 
cares. 
 
And yet Diamond has written about oil or gas exploration in his beloved New 
Guinea (either in Collapse or an Op Ed piece can't remember) about one of the 
companies being very cognizant of environmental issues (had to do with how they 
built the roads to and from the mining sites I think amoung other things). He 
contrasted this to another company with more traditional approach; the 
environmentally aware company did better - sorry that I can't remember the 
details. The  conclusion was that environmentally sensitive actions were not 
more expensive. One way use the market to insure environmental protection is to 
insure that the costs of doing business include the environmental costs (e.g 
how much will cost to clean up a site after it is mined out). We have a better 
handle on this now. If the true cots are figured in a corporation will have to 
make a market driven choice as to how much it is worth to do something to the 
environment since it will have to pay those costs. 
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. 
All on demand. Always Free.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to