Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumFossil Fuels' 'Easy Money' and the Need for a New Economic System
https://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/06/11-4Energy giant Kinder Morgan was recently called insensitive for pointing out that Pipeline spills can have both positive and negative effects on local and regional economies, both in the short- and long-term. The company wants to triple its shipping capacity from the Alberta tar sands to Burnaby, in part by twinning its current pipeline. Its National Energy Board submission states, Spill response and cleanup creates business and employment opportunities for affected communities, regions, and cleanup service providers.
It may seem insensitive, but its true. And thats the problem. Destroying the environment is bad for the planet and all the life it supports, including us. But its often good for business. The 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico added billions to the U.S. gross domestic product! Even if a spill never occurred (a big if, considering the records of Kinder Morgan and other pipeline companies), increasing capacity from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels a day would go hand-in-hand with rapid tar sands expansion and more wasteful, destructive burning of fossil fuelsas would approval of Enbridge Northern Gateway and other pipeline projects, as well as increased oil shipments by rail.
The company will make money, the government will reap some tax and royalty benefits and a relatively small number of jobs will be created. But the massive costs of dealing with a pipeline or tanker spill and the resulting climate change consequences will far outweigh the benefits. Of course, under our current economic paradigm, even the costs of responding to global warming impacts show as positive growth in the GDP the tool we use to measure what passes for progress in this strange worldview.
And so its full speed ahead and damn the consequences. Everything is measured in money. B.C.s economy seems sluggish? Well, obviously, the solution is to get fracking and sell the gas to Asian markets. Never mind that a recent study, commissioned by the Canadian government, concludes we dont know enough about the practice to say its safe, the federal government has virtually no regulations surrounding it and provincial rules are not based on strong science and remain untested. Never mind that the more infrastructure we build for polluting, climate-disrupting fossil fuels, the longer it will take us to move away from them. Theres easy money to be hadfor someone.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)There are even blueprints for what such systems might look like (e.g. Hermann Daly's Steady State Economics).
But I have not seen any feasible suggestions for how to unseat the old paradigm to make way for the new - at least not at anything above a purely personal level.
It's entwined with the problem that we face with our global ecological impact in general.
Ecologically, we are already in severe overshoot, and there seems to be no way to get from where we are to any situation that would be remotely sustainable - at least not without destroying the social fabric we depend on and damaging the lives of untold people in the process.
Economically, we are also in overshoot - the global economic system has become far larger, more pervasive and powerful than any of the national governments that might be tasked with altering its course. In fact, on a global scale economics now controls governance, rather than the other way around. The cybernetic control system of civilization has been disrupted: the negative feedback loops of governmental control have been supplanted by the positive feedbacks of corporate growth.
We will develop new economic systems, but only after many existing global economic linkages have been broken, and the largest players crushed under the weight of changing physical circumstances.
David Suzuki's words are taking on an increasing tone of desperation, and one doesn't need to scratch very deep to uncover the despair that lies beneath them. Suzuki has been one of the world's great environmental optimists. If he now feels this way, what does it say about our true situation?
Bigmack
(8,020 posts)When i was young....and not looking forward very much to being old - as I'm now lucky enough to be....I never thought I'd welcome old age....because at least I probably won't live long enough to see the sh't actually hit the fan. It's WAY PAST time for a TOTALLY new economic system, but damned if i can figure out what it should be. Near as I can tell tho this "do whatever the fuck you want to if it'll make you some jing," ain't the one we should have. Seems to me that some kind of central planning is ESSENTIAL.