Me says: The rub comes in when you realize the cost associated with the resource is wildly understated. It reflects only the economic costs but not subjective environmental costs.
jar: Exactly.
Are you willing to pay the actual cost of your tissue? Who determines the environmental costs?
The same for transport. What environmental cost is assessed for road? The cost of the trees that won’t be grown? Smog? Cancers?
Too messy. But this is exactly what needs to be done, not on some case-by-case basis, but on a national policy basis. That makes it a political issue on how/who makes that assessment. Enter the arena of Big Carbon, the environmental impact study, and that perennial favorite,
Smoke and Mirrors In the Halls of Congress.
You’re in Texas (my sympathies btw) but do you really trust your state to assess carbon costs of gas and oil?
Ok, put down the cane I really didn't think so. Easy there.
You and I could probably come up with a pretty good plan in a few posts but we don’t have $$$trillions at stake in wealth, influence, power. That’s the kind of money to kill for, literally.
Assessing an environmental tax on our production, use and waste of materials, gasses and heat, is a call to battle.
Probably not going to happen. Now what?
Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.