A Polluted Future?

[GeneW]

The benefit of using a market based approach to regulation is that it lets consumers decide by choosing the costs of regulations.

Today we accept the costs of automobiles. We accept the number of deaths on the roads. We accept the burdens of automobile ownership, especially the costs of the vehicles, their fueling and upkeep, the responsibilities of driving sensibly (which most of us do) and so on. We accept through insurance the costs of accidents.

In a like vein I think that people ought to be permitted to decide just how much they're willing to pay for a clean environment and for energy from biomass sources. I think that those who want such sources of energy need to market their choices to those who might have other priorities.

In contrast, government regulation is coercion. People are not free to weigh the costs and benefits in terms of their own values, judgment and experience. Instead we are confronted with either acceptance or punishment, based upon a third party's values and judgment. In essence we are being treated like children or livestock. We are being insulted and degraded like chattel or slaves.

I think Skewbie and like minded readers here need to re-examine their attitudes about the goodness and necessity of government regulation. They are not necessarily wiser or more intelligent than some of us who do not embrace their ideals, attitudes or conclusions.

Gene

[skewbe]

I think you need to learn how to get to the point ya windbag. Quit with the BS stories chocked full of short sighted half truths. Talk about needing an attitude adjustment.

people with money to buy goods and services should not be deciding how much pollution other people, who do not buy those goods and services, should accept. nor should those goods and services be made artificially cheap by ignoring their impact on the environment. This is a failure of the market system, not britain or whatever half baked conclusion you have come up with this time.

[psyshack]

The skewbe once again insults folks and refuse's to look at thought patterns. And any level of reasoning and idea development cause it doesn't meet his red square logic.

[trollbait]

The regulation of drugs and pollution are not comparable.
My neighbor toking up in the privacy of his home does not harm me.
Putting in a coal fired heating system that will deposit radioactive isotopes and mercury in my yard does.

The market often doesn't include the price of pollution in products. Factoring in the cost of pollution clean-up and care of pollution related medical problems, the price of gasoline would start at $5 a gallon. Adding political and military costs, the price can climb to $11.

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by skewbe

I think you need to learn how to get to the point ya windbag. Quit with the BS stories chocked full of short sighted half truths. Talk about needing an attitude adjustment.

people with money to buy goods and services should not be deciding how much pollution other people, who do not buy those goods and services, should accept. nor should those goods and services be made artificially cheap by ignoring their impact on the environment. This is a failure of the market system, not britain or whatever half baked conclusion you have come up with this time.

The State failed to protect the environment in the USSR. The authoritarian government in China, which continues to call itself "socialist", has a parade of ecological disasters. You claim that our "capitalistic" system has failed even though the US has some of the toughest pollution laws on Earth.

Failure is its own best demonstration, Skewbie.

Gene

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by trollbait

The regulation of drugs and pollution are not comparable.
My neighbor toking up in the privacy of his home does not harm me.
Putting in a coal fired heating system that will deposit radioactive isotopes and mercury in my yard does.

Let's do the math, trollbait, shall we?

According to here http://igs.indiana.edu/Geology/coalO...Coal/index.cfm

The average sampled mecury content was 0.11mgHg/Kg of coal. This gives you per US ton of coal about 100 milligrams of mercury.

Assuming about three tons per year combusted gives 300 milligrams of mercury. That's a heavy figure, incidentally, as most of the people I know who burn coal might do a ton a year.

Let's assume that the coal is burned only during "cold" periods, about four months per year or about 120 days. That gives a daily dose of 300 milligrams divided by 120 or about 2.5 milligrams per day, or about 0.104 milligrams per hour. For purposes of simplicity we'll assume uniform rates of consumption of coal.

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning a toxic dose of mercury in air is about 0.7 to 42 micrograms per cubic meter of air on a chronic basis.

Now, this is where things get complicated... exactly how much air is diluting that 0.104 milligrams of mercury per hour? Let's simplify it still more then...

Let's compute the amount of air needed for a threshold toxicity value.

Dividing 104 microgramsHg/Hr by 0.7 micrograms/meter cubed gives us 150 cubic meters of air per hour.

This is seems like a reasonable figure. However Trollbait there is a complication. I'm basically assuming that you're gonna stick your head into your neighbor's stack and breathe that nasty coal burning stuff until you get sick. The article did not define "chronic exposure" by duration but I have a feeling that other combustion products would get you before the mercury got you.

Most stack plumes reach up and out. People miles downwind might see trace amounts of it. If you and your yard saw one percent we're talking a very tiny amount of mercury into your yard and environs.

I'd be more worried about your neighbor getting the munchies and smacking into you with his car. Hopefully he or she planned ahead and is eating fondue or ice cream or chips or whatever instead of trying to pilot a car under the influence.

Now the other constituents of coal combustion, especially the NOx and SOx, could be a genuine nuisance issue. They smell foul. You'd be right to raise some hell in court, except that you can't do that any more.

No sir, Trollbait, the EPA and your State environmental regulatory agencies are on the case. Not you. Sorry.

BTW, I didn't get into the radioactive constituents of coal combustion products. They're mainly heavy items like uranium and thorium, which themselves are not terribly toxic to people. Thorium, for example, was used in lantern filaments and is part of some sand deposits in India. Uranium may still be used for whitening dentures. I don't think that fission products like cesium or strontium can be found in coal - those are nasty.

Originally Posted by trollbait

The market often doesn't include the price of pollution in products. Factoring in the cost of pollution clean-up and care of pollution related medical problems, the price of gasoline would start at $5 a gallon. Adding political and military costs, the price can climb to $11.

Says who?

What sort of "clean up" is associated with gasoline?

What are these "political" costs you speak of?

The military costs are pretty easy to see, though one could argue that our methods of doing business are unsound and that use and abuse of our military in the middle east is a form of military keynesianism rather than a direct cost of using oil. In plain English, we're using wars to "prime the pump" of the economy.


Gene

[skewbe]

Originally Posted by GeneW

The State failed to protect the environment in the USSR/China.
Gene

Those are states that are not governed by the people! Do you think like psy that everyone else is a commie if they don't agree with you? Do you not realize the focus on the environment is much greater now or do you have a static view of the world from 50 years ago?

If all you care about in life is money then you are going to throw out all other concerns. I think there are more important things in life than money, but the market system does not inherently preserve anything that is not associated with profit. People have bandied the religion word around, guess they are worshipping money, and it is a little sickening.

Recognize that the market is not perfect, that there needs to be checks and balances. Do you think Slavery was ok? We can just throw out those child labor laws, and kids born to parents w/no money can just be forced to work the coal mines as soon as they can pick up a shovel?

Face it, the market would sell it's own mother. What people want is what counts, not what a few long winded market zealots want.

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by psyshack

The skewbe once again insults folks and refuse's to look at thought patterns. And any level of reasoning and idea development cause it doesn't meet his red square logic.

It's tempting to get annoyed, even angry, when people start to call names and insult one's intelligence.

As I see it, the Market is about free exchange, value for value. I offer ideas, and they may not be accepted. So I offer other ideas, counterpoints and develop understanding.

The Market is about satisfying wants and needs. A fair exchange. A trade. Freedom of choice. I've lived my life by it for many years after I abandoned the sterile world of coercion and organized violence.

When I thought that I had the right to make others do my bidding, rather than offer them possibilities, alternatives or simply what they desired.


On the other hand, Skewbie acts like a government agent. He states how things are going to be. Anyone who deviates from the government view gets smacked down. You aren't asked what you want, you're told what you'll do.

The contrast is pretty plain. Most self respecting adults won't put up with being coerced given an alternative.

Gene

[skewbe]

Originally Posted by skewbe

Those are states that are not governed by the people! Do you think like psy that everyone else is a commie if they don't agree with you? Do you not realize the focus on the environment is much greater now or do you have a static view of the world from 50 years ago?

If all you care about in life is money then you are going to throw out all other concerns. I think there are more important things in life than money, but the market system does not inherently preserve anything that is not associated with profit. People have bandied the religion word around, guess they are worshipping money, and it is a little sickening.

Recognize that the market is not perfect, that there needs to be checks and balances. Do you think Slavery was ok? We can just throw out those child labor laws, and kids born to parents w/no money can just be forced to work the coal mines as soon as they can pick up a shovel?

Face it, the market would sell it's own mother. What people want is what counts, not what a few long winded market zealots want.

So if we are done complaining about our own injuries and can take a break from pandering to the "call everyone a commie or government agent" bandwagon (and patting ourselves on the back), then what IS your position on slavery and child labor laws? Will you say that some other country did it too so it is ok? That other countries are currently doing it? Do you even care what the people want if it has nothing to do with money?

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by skewbe

Those are states that are not governed by the people!

Do you think that we're "governed by the people" in the US?

In 2000 Bush "stole" the election from Al Gore, who himself was trying to steal it in Florida by limiting ballot recounts. Same thing happened in Washington State a few years later, when the Democrat found 'ballots" and had enough recounts to win the election.

In 1960 Nixon conceded the election to Kennedy. He lost by 100,000 votes, most of which came from Cook County, and were probably faked.

Happened a lot in our country.

As Stalin put it best, "It's not who votes, it's who counts the votes". Lyndon Johnson (he was President in the 1960s) said, "Keep counting until you get the result you want".

Originally Posted by skewbe

Do you think like psy that everyone else is a commie if they don't agree with you?

I don't think you're a "commie". You sure do say some awfully authoritarian things, Skewbie. I'm frankly appalled at your lackadaisical attitude about coercion and organized violence.

You seem to think that passing laws and making people do things is perfectly reasonable.

Originally Posted by skewbe

Do you not realize the focus on the environment is much greater now...

Focus? Whose focus? Yours? Mine? The bulk of the people?

Do you think most Americans really care about the environment like you do? Is that why SUVs keep selling so well? Detroit is bringing back muscle cars!

Is that why our Senate rejected the Kyoto Treaty 92-0 the last time anyone bothered to submit it? Is that why the government has to subsidize "alternative energy" instead of consumers rushing to buy it?

Sounds to me, Skewbie, like a whole lot of talking and not a lot of action is going on about the "environment". Maybe because the "focus" isn't on the environment as much one as might imagine.

Originally Posted by skewbe

or do you have a static view of the world from 50 years ago?

Actually, Skewbie, my point of view is growing and more "fashionable" than your tired old "let's make people do things" school.

BTW, fifty years ago was 1958. Year after the IGY. US and USSR were competing for influence all over the world. Fighting wars.

I'm not fighting any wars. Are you?

Originally Posted by skewbe

If all you care about in life is money then you are going to throw out all other concerns. I think there are more important things in life than money, but the market system does not inherently preserve anything that is not associated with profit.

You have a very simplistic and naive view of capitalism, Skewbie. Much more to life than profit.

However, I'd tend to think that you're a bit enamored with power. I think you like to give orders.

Originally Posted by skewbe

People have bandied the religion word around, guess they are worshipping money, and it is a little sickening.

I haven't breathed a word about my Faith, Skewbie. That's not germane to this conversation.

However since you broached the topic, do you believe in Gaia?

Originally Posted by skewbe

Recognize that the market is not perfect, that there needs to be checks and balances.

Wow, you want perfection. Imagine that, you want the Market to be perfect or it won't work, but you'll accept the State just as it is.

Checks and balances? Who watches the watchers? Helpful hint; Nobody watches the watchers.

Originally Posted by skewbe

Do you think Slavery was ok?

Considering that I work several months each year to pay all of the taxes that I owe, I'd say "No".

To be honest, owning another human being is disgusting.

Originally Posted by skewbe

We can just throw out those child labor laws, and kids born to parents w/no money can just be forced to work the coal mines as soon as they can pick up a shovel?

...except that mining coal is cheaper with machines. Children make lousy workers. I know, I work with kids in their late teens. Some of them are hopeless.

Do they feed kids stupid drugs today or something?

Originally Posted by skewbe

Face it, the market would sell it's own mother.

No. You face it. Selling one's mother would appall most customers, who'd refuse to buy from you.

Originally Posted by skewbe

What people want is what counts, not what a few long winded market zealots want.

You're being ironic, whether you know it or not, Skewbie.

The Market is solely concerned about what people want. People want gigantic SUVs and they're made. People want thrifty cars and they're made.

In contrast, zealots like yourself just want to make people do things. You're not worried about nature. If you were really worried about nature you'd be persuading people to help you preserve it. You'd raise consciousness.

You'd be telling me that saving the planet is good for business. You might discover that I'm hip about controlling pollution through lawsuits and other market oriented means.

In case I bored you with my "windbag" posts, I'll reiterate what I do for a living. I work in the energy industry, in saving power. I test and qualify devices that save electricity for industry.

My employer's machines will pay for themselves with one year of electricity savings. For several years afterwards we can save industry millions of dollars, burn less coal and do more with less.

I also bought one of the most fuel efficient cars made today. I can afford a gas guzzler, a pickup truck or an SUV. I voted with my money.

I bet I do more every day to save the planet than you do. I can almost guarantee it.

You've got an axe to grind with "capitalism". You want to coerce people. Saving the planet or nature takes a back seat. Your priorities, Skewbie, are crystal clear to me.

Gene