Friday, March 02, 2007

Toward a pro-growth environmental policy

We can deal with these issues without a sense of panic. If we panic, we do things which create other problems which may be worse than the original. Poverty is the real crisis in the world and environmentalist solutions will create more of it. It is nice for the rich Europeans and Americans to worry about such things while people suffer in the 10/40 window from their policies. Environmentalism is the new colonialism. It does not have to be that way.

A sound sustainable ecology benefits all of us. We can have a clean ecology and a growing economy with protections for property rights.

Here are my top ten economically sound environmental solutions.
10. More Nuclear power -- clean air and cheap power (no net CO2 either)--put the waste back in secure locations in the ground like the site in Nevada.

9. Make it a national energy priority to find the better battery. The biggest problem with solar, hydro, and wind power is that we can not store huge amount of electricity for long.

8. Zealously guard our water supply. Give foreign aid credits to poorer countries which must be redeemed for clean water programs. It would save more lives and increase productivity more than anything.

7. Tie a portion of Farm Aid to sound environmental practices such as run off prevention.

6.Give Investment tax credits for green R & D programs and exempt them from AMT.

5.Include a basic environmental protocol in any trade agreement, for replenishing trees, clean water infrastructure, scrubbers.

4.Biofuels--mandate all new cares to be duel burning and give tax credits if for factories retooled in America --regardless of manufacturer.

3.The next generation of infrastructure should include more mass transit. We subsidize roads why not tracks.

2. Encourage Energy Smart homes with interest rate credits.

1. Push develop of clean trash to steam. Slow down the landfill crisis and generate cheap energy.

Have we found a sensible middle ground here?


Blogger Duffy said...

I have to disagree with point #3. Mass transit works only in highly densely populated areas. How many times do you see a DART bus running empty (or virtually so)? Making rail or even light rail doesn't make sense either. The infrastructure cost is prohibitive.

Why not a Manhattan Project for alternative fuel? Or an X-Prize type prize for same.

If you want to decrease consumption, encourage New Urbanism which focuses on walkable communities.

Give employers tax credits for employees who work from home.

11:11 AM  
Blogger David said...

Good input. Finding alternative fuel is a matter of national security these days.

I am not a big fan of government micromanaging were we live and work. I think if we reclaim our cities from crime and decay that will naturally take care of itself.


11:17 AM  
Anonymous Fred said...

Not a bad start...

I would say that a lot of the buses are full...I am guessing that overall, they are still more efficient then most forms of transportation.

I would also push conservation a bit more....great on pushing for new sources or ideas, but we got to use less then we do now.

12:06 PM  
Blogger David said...

I agree. We are starting to with the energy star tax credits. I don't like increasing the MPG requirements because studies show that it will hinder biofuels which is where I lean.

Fred, I am beginning to think that conservation is also becoming a measure of national security. Thanks for the input. You always add to the discussion.

12:17 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home