Solve 4 Biggies
  ~  by reducing income taxes & increasing energy taxes

                          
   
New entries Wednesday &
Sunday evenings
  (& sometimes in between)

- Contribute to this online
  public conversation -





   1 - Global warming

   2 - Dependence on
        foreign energy

   3 - Trade deficit

   4 - Pollution from non-
        renewable fuels

Conservation

Print the article

This entry was posted on 7/30/2008 11:11 PM and is filed under Tax Shifting,Energy Conservation,Economics.

To make conservation happen, give people a significant financial incentive - it's as simple as that.  We live in a capitalistic society.  There are financial advantages to many forms of conservation -- particularly lighting options, insulating homes, replacing inefficient furnaces, driving smaller vehicles and of course eliminating waste - "air doors" are my favorite.  Based on results, the financial incentives are not large enough to spur action.

Here's a program that aired today on National Public Radio - Vermont's Unique Approach To Curbing Energy Use.  The Efficiency Vermont program, which started in 2000, is better than nothing, but as stated in the program, "progress has not been easy, or cheap, and there is still a long way to go."

The program concludes with "Many [states] have much more ambitious energy-conservation goals, but no tool quite as sophisticated as the Efficiency Vermont program to meet them."

So, these other states are pissing in the wind..........but at least they've set conservation goals.  The other states don't have tools as sophisticated as Vermont's - a program that's not meeting needed targets.  Pissing in the wind.

The answer to making conservation really happen:  follow the advice of thousands of economists (source:
Lester Brown, Earth Policy Institute) and phase-in a federal tax shift from income to non-renewable energy.

&  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  & 

The way to get businesses to not use air doors (e.g., have you walked by a Las Vegas casino on a hot summer day?), is not legislation as is suggested in the N.Y. Times article; the answer is profit and loss.

 del.icio.us  Stumbleupon  Technorati  Digg 

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • No trackbacks exist for this entry.
Comments
    • No comments exist for this entry.
Leave a comment

Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Enter the above security code (required)

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.