Re:The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacr...
by francisofascii on Thursday November 11, 2021 @02:09PM
(#29191801)
The right to pollute should never be granted in perpetuity. If anything, it should be a recurring cost that increases or decreases based on the how much polluting is occurring. That way the markets work in incentivizing less polluting.
Re:The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacr...
by LorenPechtel on Thursday November 11, 2021 @03:37PM
(#29192832)
Yup. For the most part I would like to see current pollution regulations tossed wholesale.
Instead, put a price tag on each pollutant. The charge is applied at the point in the supply chain where the pollutant is created or extracted and is rebated to anyone who destroys the pollutant (although they may be charged for other pollutants created in the process.) Think of the oft-proposed carbon tax, just much, much broader.
Re:The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacr...
by drawqrtz on Thursday November 11, 2021 @05:19PM
(#29193981)
In an ideal world this would be a great solution, but on earth I think this would invite a whole host of corruption, similar to the carbon offset trading. Not combating the problem but making everyone richer.
Re:The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacr...
by boringg on Thursday November 11, 2021 @02:31PM
(#29192075)
This is interesting and far too progressive for any of the cities to regulate at this time (or at any point in the past). This does sound like the right way to permit new industrial areas / processes. Though I imagine it might be difficult to pull off. Grandfathered industries would have such a huge advantage.
Re:The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacr...
by convolvatron on Thursday November 11, 2021 @12:59PM
(#29190910)
aren't you assuming we spend the money to adequately track the problem and hold the correct people responsible? that's certainly not the case now in the US. maybe you can fix that by creating a market somehow?
In general this can be solved with an extension of property rights, the industrial zone/airport/music venue etc can own the rights to "pollute" the neighboring areas, much like buying air rights in a city. Then it's clear when you purchase / rent / what level of noise / pollution you can expect.
This allows market forces to work, if after a certain time the city is bigger and that land is more valuable for quality housing then they can buy the rights from the polluter and shut it down.