• U.N. environment chief: Polluters must pick up tab for damage to planet
    46 replies, posted
[QUOTE]TEPIC, Mexico (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Turning the planet’s environmental fortunes around is achievable if businesses, politicians and citizens work towards a common goal, with the biggest polluters picking up the bill, said the United Nations’ environment chief. Highlighting the dramatic progress made by China and India, Erik Solheim, executive director of UN Environment, urged governments to take a joined-up approach to going green. “The profit of destroying nature or polluting the planet is nearly always privatized, while the costs of polluting the planet or the cost of destroying ecosystems is nearly always socialized,” he told an international conference on sustainable development at New York’s Columbia University on Monday. “That cannot continue,“ he said. ”Anyone who pollutes, anyone who destroys nature must pay the cost for that destruction or that pollution.” [/QUOTE] [url]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-environment-pollution/polluters-must-pick-up-tab-for-damage-to-planet-u-n-environment-chief-idUSKCN1BU0XG[/url] A carbon tax should be implemented ASAP.
You break it, you buy it. Sounds fair to me. Oh wait they already own it
[quote]The profit of destroying nature or polluting the planet is nearly always privatized, while the costs of polluting the planet or the cost of destroying ecosystems is nearly always socialized.[/quote] Our leaders wouldn't want it any other way.
[QUOTE=Morgen;52712492][url]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-environment-pollution/polluters-must-pick-up-tab-for-damage-to-planet-u-n-environment-chief-idUSKCN1BU0XG[/url] A carbon tax should be implemented ASAP.[/QUOTE] I'd like to see a meat tax as well and promote a flexitarian or plant-based diets. It will take at least another decade or two before lab-grown meat is a viable alternative, so the real thing should be curbed as much as possible. It also doesn't help that governments actively subsidize animal agriculture. A greater push to a sustainable alternative would be great. Besides that, automatization will change farming entirely. Making preparation for the future even more important.
Shame one of the major world superpowers is now run by people that don't believe in climate change.
[QUOTE=Kaelnukem;52712621]I'd like to see a meat tax as well and promote a flexitarian or plant-based diets. [/QUOTE] Not even kidding, I recently wanted to cook with some chicken and chinese cabbage, and the chinese cabbage was more expensive than 500g of chicken. What a weird world to live in.
Step one should be to start assfucking the companies worldwide who push for coal, natural gas, et-al on electrical grids, those who oppose Nuclear for no reason other than it would lessen their market share, and those who oppose civil maritime use of naval reactors in ships. Sadly, step one is instead going to be aimed at assfucking poor people who can't afford to replace their daily driver.
[QUOTE=DrDevil;52712795]Not even kidding, I recently wanted to cook with some chicken and chinese cabbage, and the chinese cabbage was more expensive than 500g of chicken. What a weird world to live in.[/QUOTE] There really is no reason for meat to be less expensive than vegetables. [editline]24th September 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=TestECull;52712954]Step one should be to start assfucking the companies worldwide who push for coal, natural gas, et-al on electrical grids, those who oppose Nuclear for no reason other than it would lessen their market share, and those who oppose civil maritime use of naval reactors in ships. Sadly, step one is instead going to be aimed at assfucking poor people who can't afford to replace their daily driver.[/QUOTE] Eventually all the coal and natural gas will run out in the world. It's really just a matter of not fucking up the planet beyond repair before we get to that point.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;52712969] Eventually all the coal and natural gas will run out in the world. It's really just a matter of not fucking up the planet beyond repair before we get to that point.[/QUOTE] Those industries are also protected by such a ridiculously strong lobby...and propped up by all the anti-nuclear bullshit people like to spread...that the 'easy' way out for things like this is to instead just to throw a carbon tax at the everyman which fucks the poor without actually fixing much of anything. We see it happening even in otherwise environmentally progressive countries, usually under the 'WE'RE NOT A CHERNOBYL/FUKUSHIMA WAITING TO HAPPEN' argument. What's funny is America could meet its 2025 climate goals if it phased out coal and natural gas in favor of nuclear within five years. Just with that. Coal and NG power plants are ridiculously huge slices of the carbon pie, slices that aren't going anywhere in our current political climate.
Climate change is a huge issue. We're already too late to reverse the amount of damage done, but we can prevent future issues. Big companies and right wing leaders know this, but money is far more important to them than the future of our planet. I welcome such an idea, but I doubt it would ever get applied.
[QUOTE=TestECull;52712974]Those industries are also protected by such a ridiculously strong lobby...and propped up by all the anti-nuclear bullshit people like to spread...that the 'easy' way out for things like this is to instead just to throw a carbon tax at the everyman which fucks the poor without actually fixing much of anything. We see it happening even in otherwise environmentally progressive countries, usually under the 'WE'RE NOT A CHERNOBYL/FUKUSHIMA WAITING TO HAPPEN' argument. What's funny is America could meet its 2025 climate goals if it phased out coal and natural gas in favor of nuclear within five years. Just with that. Coal and NG power plants are ridiculously huge slices of the carbon pie, slices that aren't going anywhere in our current political climate.[/QUOTE] Carbon taxes incentivize people to buy lower carbon products, or be forced to pay a premium for the pollution emitting product. This is pretty basic stuff. If you implement a carbon tax then you should cut taxes elsewhere, and phase it in. See Norway's adoption of EVs as a bit of an extreme example.
[QUOTE=New_Pride;52712980]Climate change is a huge issue. We're already too late to reverse the amount of damage done, but we can prevent future issues. Big companies and right wing leaders know this, but money is far more important to them than the future of our planet. I welcome such an idea, but I doubt it would ever get applied.[/QUOTE] In a good world, these creatures would be afraid for their very lives, knowing that no amount of money can shield them from being torn limb from limb by a ravening horde of desperate and determined people, a mob that runs like a raging torrent and flows like a river.
Can we also enforce debts on lesser pollution? I'm sick of seeing cigarette butts thrown wherever, trash wrappers left in national forests,..
[QUOTE=Kaelnukem;52712621]I'd like to see a meat tax as well and promote a flexitarian or plant-based diets. [B]It will take at least another decade or two before lab-grown meat is a viable alternative[/B], so the real thing should be curbed as much as possible. It also doesn't help that governments actively subsidize animal agriculture. A greater push to a sustainable alternative would be great. Besides that, automatization will change farming entirely. Making preparation for the future even more important.[/QUOTE] Nope, [URL="https://www.wired.com/story/the-impossible-burger/"]https://www.wired.com/story/the-impossible-burger/[/URL] But the Hardcore Green groups are throwing a hissy fit because it's GMO
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;52713091]Nope, [URL="https://www.wired.com/story/the-impossible-burger/"]https://www.wired.com/story/the-impossible-burger/[/URL] But the Hardcore Green groups are throwing a hissy fit because it's GMO[/QUOTE] Sucks that green parties are often dumb. Jill Stein for example doesn't believe in nuclear energy.
Looks legit, although the proof in the pudding is in the eating. And in the cost of buying a pack of Impossible Burgers relative to a pack of traditional beef patties. It's good to reduce the cost of production, but you really ought to pass those savings on to the consumer, as opposed to dropping a ludicrous mark-up on the product. I would have to try it myself before proclaiming it to truly be legit.
[QUOTE=Morgen;52712990]Carbon taxes incentivize people to buy lower carbon products, or be forced to pay a premium for the pollution emitting product.[/quote] What they actually do...and I speak from firsthand experience here...is make it even harder for poor people to reduce their carbon footprint. We already can't afford to buy a new car(I can't even afford to fill my fridge and replace a flat tire, much less the note on a newer vehicle), how in the hell is making us pay even more money we don't have to fuel the car we currently drive gonna help us buy a newer one? It's pretty basic logic as to how carbon taxes assfuck the poor. And then those who can afford to replace their car generally either already buy 'clean and green' or don't give enough of a damn and will just shrug. You end up with a situation where the poor get shit on while the middle class and the rich can just shrug and carry on with their business as if nothing had been done at all, all while the real problem entities pretty much get ignored outright and continue to spew not only CO2 but toxic and radioactive emissions willy-nilly. The correct angle of attack is towards the power grid, but the one most often and most likely to be chosen here is the one that attacks the everyman. What's truly laughable is that EV Drivers who live and work in regions who use coal for their electrical grid put out more, and worse, pollution than I do driving a 31 year old pickup. It may not be coming out of the back of their car but they're charging that car off a system far nastier than an old carburetted I6 with a modern catalyst cleaning its act up. If EV drivers living in these areas truly want to be able to brag about being clean they need to see to it those coal plants get shut down in favor of something that's actually green. [quote]If you implement a carbon tax then you should cut taxes elsewhere, and phase it in.[/quote] I'd be fine with this, because my net tax burden would remain the same and thus I wouldn't have to worry about whether or not I could put food in my fridge or fuel in my truck.
[QUOTE=TestECull;52713319]What they actually do...and I speak from firsthand experience here...is make it even harder for poor people to reduce their carbon footprint. We already can't afford to buy a new car(I can't even afford to fill my fridge and replace a flat tire, much less the note on a newer vehicle), how in the hell is making us pay even more money we don't have to fuel the car we currently drive gonna help us buy a newer one? It's pretty basic logic as to how carbon taxes assfuck the poor. And then those who can afford to replace their car generally either already buy 'clean and green' or don't give enough of a damn and will just shrug. You end up with a situation where the poor get shit on while the middle class and the rich can just shrug and carry on with their business as if nothing had been done at all, all while the real problem entities pretty much get ignored outright and continue to spew not only CO2 but toxic and radioactive emissions willy-nilly. The correct angle of attack is towards the power grid, but the one most often and most likely to be chosen here is the one that attacks the everyman. What's truly laughable is that EV Drivers who live and work in regions who use coal for their electrical grid put out more, and worse, pollution than I do driving a 31 year old pickup. It may not be coming out of the back of their car but they're charging that car off a system far nastier than an old carburetted I6 with a modern catalyst cleaning its act up. If EV drivers living in these areas truly want to be able to brag about being clean they need to see to it those coal plants get shut down in favor of something that's actually green. I'd be fine with this, because my net tax burden would remain the same and thus I wouldn't have to worry about whether or not I could put food in my fridge or fuel in my truck.[/QUOTE] Your truck would just become a greater percentage of your outgoings. Most of Europe has some sort of carbon tax on fuel. Coal is dieing, and is already mostly gone from most places in the western world. Electric generation is a big source of emissions, but so is transportation. In the USA passenger vehicles, and pick-up trucks alone account for more emissions than the whole agricultural sector.
[QUOTE=Kaelnukem;52712621]I'd like to see a meat tax as well and promote a flexitarian or plant-based diets. It will take at least another decade or two before lab-grown meat is a viable alternative, so the real thing should be curbed as much as possible. It also doesn't help that governments actively subsidize animal agriculture. A greater push to a sustainable alternative would be great. Besides that, automatization will change farming entirely. Making preparation for the future even more important.[/QUOTE] Not sure why everyone is rating this negatively, animal husbandry is responsible for a very significant portion of our greenhouse gas emissions, not to mention deforestation, pollution from poorly handled animal waste, and algal blooms due to runoff from farms.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52713908]Not sure why everyone is rating this negatively, animal husbandry is responsible for a very significant portion of our greenhouse gas emissions, not to mention deforestation, pollution from poorly handled animal waste, and algal blooms due to runoff from farms.[/QUOTE] Ideally a properly implemented carbon tax should cover all industries. So no need to separately implement a "meat tax".
[QUOTE=c:;52713067]Can we also enforce debts on lesser pollution? I'm sick of seeing cigarette butts thrown wherever, trash wrappers left in national forests,..[/QUOTE] Yes those are already illegal and you can be ticketed for them.........
[QUOTE=Morgen;52713467]Electric generation is a big source of emissions, but so is transportation. In the USA passenger vehicles, and pick-up trucks alone account for more emissions than the whole agricultural sector.[/QUOTE] I find this easy to believe, as someone who lives in the southern US, every other vehicle around here is some oversize truck like this one being driven around like a sedan. [T]http://i.imgur.com/RgM0VvB.jpg[/T] As much as I'd like to see just about every one of these things crushed, good luck prying them away from all the good ol' boyz who idolize these vehicles
[QUOTE=Morgen;52713917]Ideally a properly implemented carbon tax should cover all industries. So no need to separately implement a "meat tax".[/QUOTE] True, but I get the feeling a lot of people either don't realise the environmental impact of meat farming, or recognise it but don't care because they're not willing to give up meat. [editline]24th September 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=RenaFox;52714015]As much as I'd like to see just about every one of these things crushed, good luck prying them away from all the good ol' boyz who idolize these vehicles[/QUOTE] Pretty much this logic, but applied to meat instead.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52714029]True, but I get the feeling a lot of people either don't realise the environmental impact of meat farming, or recognise it but don't care because they're not willing to give up meat.[/QUOTE] Do we have to give up meat? I mean is the issue that we have a meat industry at all or is the issue just that the industry sucks as it is now?
Some animal are worse than others. Cattle are the worst due to the inefficiency of their digestive system. Switching from beef to chicken would be a huge saving. Though research is being done into making feed more efficient for cattle to digest. I'm not particularly well educated in the agricultural side of emissions so I'm not sure how much of the sectors emissions are technological in nature Vs just animals consuming a bunch of food.
[QUOTE=Kaelnukem;52712621]I'd like to see a meat tax as well and promote a flexitarian or plant-based diets. It will take at least another decade or two before lab-grown meat is a viable alternative, so the real thing should be curbed as much as possible. It also doesn't help that governments actively subsidize animal agriculture. A greater push to a sustainable alternative would be great. Besides that, automatization will change farming entirely. Making preparation for the future even more important.[/QUOTE] Eh, I'd prefer taxing just red meats, since you're not supposed to eat much of that to begin with yet people unironically call America "Burgerland" because of how much they're part of our culture. Getting a well-balanced meal without cooking it myself is already costly enough, it doesn't need to get higher just because I don't want to go vegetarian. [editline]a[/editline] Like, say I go to Panera Bread (this is probably the closest thing to healthy fast food I have in my area). I'll probably get some sort of Caesar Salad with chicken or a Chicken Chipotle Avocado melt, some Macaroni and Cheese or Chicken Noodle soup, and either an apple or bread depending on if I get the soup. No matter what combination of stuff I get, it has chicken in it. Now, take into account that a meal with two of those items and a side in it is $9.58 before any taxes. The vast majority of their drinks are $2.29 on top of that, so before even reaching the stage of taxing, I'm at $11.87. If I go to McDonalds and get a double quarter pounder with large fries and a massive drink, it's like $8 [I]after[/I] taxes.
As Morgen mentioned earlier, a well-designed carbon tax will account for differences in environmental impact in the rearing of various animals. I imagine livestock producers will be taxed both directly and indirectly; the former for methane emissions, and the latter in the form of increased feed prices. The fact is our demand for meat has grown so large (and still continues to grow) that producers have expanded their operations to beyond what is environmentally sustainable. Meat is so cheap because the environmental damage it's causing hasn't been paid for, but it will catch up with us sooner or later.
If the idea is to kill the profitability of meat, you would end up toppling the meat industry and with it, damn near half the food industry including everything from frozen dinners to fast food.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;52715547]If the idea is to kill the profitability of meat, you would end up toppling the meat industry and with it, damn near half the food industry including everything from frozen dinners to fast food.[/QUOTE] If the meat industry can't be profitable without destroying the planet, maybe it's time to rethink the way we eat.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52715665]If the meat industry can't be profitable without destroying the planet, maybe it's time to rethink the way we eat.[/QUOTE] Neither can the agriculture industry. Deforrestation, pesticides, carbon footprint from equipment, etc. We should put a carbon tax on that as well. It's not as much about the way we eat, but about the way we produce what we eat. I can guarantee you the deer meat in my freezer has been produced with less emissions than the green beans, broccoli, and carrots at wal-mart.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.