[Terrapreta] Carbon tax

[Jim Joyner]

If it weren't already obvious, I'm not keen on gov't solutions but, ya 
know, there is a simpler way of doing this -- and, at least in US, could 
have been done through equitable court action before all the states made 
it illegal bring class actions suits for environmental issues. This is 
before we institutionalized politics into the environment with the EPA.

There was a time in both statute and common law that if someone changed 
(not unnecessarily damaged, just changed) my/our property or any those 
common things we all need like air and water, I/we could bring suit to 
have the change-or make things as they were -- regardless of damage.

For example, instead of jumping through all these hoops in making laws 
that will create artificial markets, create bureaucracies and, 
invariably, not treat someone fairly, just make the change-or correct 
the changes made. Like, if you take some carbon out of the ground or 
bring it into the country, you have to put it back in the ground (or pay 
to do so).

One obvious industry to spring up over night would be the making of 
charcoal that is to be buried. If it turns that TP can revolutionize 
agriculture, so much the better. If not someone just has to pay to bury 
it, period.

Yes, this will drive up the price of petro products, and only the most 
valuable of those products will continue to be used. But, what is so 
equitable about doing this (the way it was done for centuries in equity) 
is that everyone is then paying (not subsidizing) the real cost of what 
they are using, i.e., they are paying the cost to keep environment they 
way it was. And, we won't be a the mercy of some beaucrat or regulatory 
agency that is in businesses back pocket (I think they call them 
"captured agencies -- like the FDA, FTC, SEC . . .)

Notice too, this completely avoids the issue and arguments about what 
damage is being done to whom and even how it's being done. Whether GW is 
anthropogenic is not longer an issue. It simply protects a long used 
principle that each of us has the right to peaceful (none polluting) use 
of our environment. (None of this should imply, however, that 
environmental damage won't happen and shouldn't be cured.)

This may seem academic. Maybe it is because using such concepts as 
inalienable rights seems pretty passe these days. It is also not likely 
that bureaucracies will cede power to the courts voluntarily, but if 
Legislatures were seized with real demand for such action, it would act 
very much like a gigantic class action suit.

Might not seem like an easy thing to do, but neither will implementing a 
carbon credits scheme -- which can have the unwholesome effect of 
actually casing more carbon to be generated above ground so it can be 
sequestered. That has happened with some other gases like freon.

Jut looking for a better way.

Jim