Comments on: Eco-nomics

By: paul

paul — Sun, 14 May 2006 06:06:45 +0000

Much better to just take a shorter shower! and in summer, the cold water is often
a reasonable temperature to use without any heating at all, especially
when just in, hot and sweaty following biking up the hill to our house.

However, seriously… I think we gain more by promoting the positive spin
offs, when we look at the whole picture and discover new ways of
improving our well being without using more electricity, gas or fuel,
or damaging the environment. Start first with your home, then your recreational activities…..

By: Bob Leonard

Bob Leonard — Thu, 11 May 2006 22:48:03 +0000

Hey Kiwis. Wanna save electricity? Try taking fewer hot showers. I asked my students about their family showering habits (frequency, duration, temperature) and we expanded that to the whole country, being a bit conservative in our assumptions, to estimate the cost of producing the hot water via electricity generation. It comes to around a billion dollars a year, just for the power. That’s not even considering the vast amount of potable water down the drain that has to be cleaned up by sewage treatment. I’m sure you resourceful Greens can think of other reasons that frequent (daily is absurd unless you are a hog farmer) hot showers are a silly luxury that we could easily do without.

By: mikeymike

mikeymike — Thu, 11 May 2006 01:52:42 +0000

the fact is that the “dollar tradable credit” is insufficient incentive to save electricity. this reflects the fact that not all “costs” of electricity generation are factored into price. ie. there is greater benefit for a business to pollute than there is in saving.

that is where cap and trade systems have the potential to correct market imbalance. carbon markets etc, etc. the mfe “projects to reduce emissions” also awards credits for activities producing savings on business as usual emissions. it places incentives where the market short changes.

payment for use of ecosystem services is a step further. rather than payment for the “right to pollute” as cap and trade is often criticised as, payment for services aims to recognise existing benefits. this was the basis for the coalition of rainforest nations presenting the case for payment at last years UN climate change sumit in montreal…

By: mugwump

mugwump — Thu, 11 May 2006 00:23:57 +0000

Huh? Saving Power is already measured in tradable credits: dollars. The power gathered from the public assets of our country’s hydrocarbon deposits and rainfall should stop being piped at heftily discounted rates to power hungry corporations like Comalco and Fonterra.

The other suggestion, trying to put a price on natural systems, seems a little abhorrent, but certainly less so than, say, the futures market or the currency futures market that can launch “speculative attacks” on foreign economies to raid their foreign reserve, as we observed during the Asian economic crisis.

Extreme caution should be kept around creating markets in green credits, unless those markets are suitably monitored to avoid the traders taking commission - it’s just another way for money to be siphoned out of the economy by bankers.