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
