Business Solutions to Environmental Problems

But, before we start I have to share with you what the regulations are relative to your information.
This is what I got:

"European Union laws require you to give European Union visitors information about cookies used and data collected on your blog. In many cases, these laws also require you to obtain consent. 

As a courtesy, we have added a notice on your blog to explain Google's use of certain Blogger and Google cookies, including use of Google Analytics and AdSense cookies, and other data collected by Google. 

You are responsible for confirming this notice actually works for your blog, and that it displays. If you employ other cookies, for example by adding third party features, this notice may not work for you. If you include functionality from other providers there may be extra information collected from your users. "

I am not using third-party apps so you don't have to worry about it.

So let's get going!

The USA government has released a report that mentions the huge cost of global climate change. So the question is: what are we supposed to do?

An organization of businessmen is proposing that the solution has to be market-oriented. Market-controlled and that it is through taxation that it can be managed. More information can be found at RepublicEn.org.

There is something coming back in this idea, the common good. Since the 70's a move towards more selfish solutions has been strengthened by the success of individual enterprises, even though the cost for the commons, the externalities, have been ignored. 

Cutting Corners and Externalizing Cost

Several times before I have blogged about how capitalists have a double standard. On the one hand, they don't want to pay taxes for the benefit of society, a society that sustains them. But on the other hand, they want society to pay when something goes wrong. They are always expecting the government, that is us, to bail them out when they make mistakes or even fraud. The example I have in mind is the disaster caused by mismanagement of a chemical plant in Texas that caused an environmental disaster when hurricane Harvey poured torrential rain over it. As you can read in the following article in The Guardian newspaper:
  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/01/harvey-shines-a-spotlight-on-a-high-risk-area-of-chemical-plants-in-texas

It was a disaster waiting to happen. Those responsible were aware of the danger but nevertheless opted for saving a few dollars, now we all have to pay. Proof of their negligence these officials were indicted for mismanagement as you can read here https://www.texastribune.org/2018/08/03/arkema-indictment-chemical-fire-hurricane-harvey/

This picture from Arkema Facebook page shows the extent of the flooding at the plant in Crosby TX.

Hurricanes are a common occurrence so how are we going to make those who are responsible for the safety of our society accountable when they neglect their duty.

Sense of Style

Reading Steven Pinker's book "The Sense of Style" helps one think about writing, have a look:
https://stevenpinker.com/publications/sense-style-thinking-persons-guide-writing-21st-century
A master of communication Pinker is clear in defining objectives and critical of the waste many authors create. We must be articulated when addressing an environmental issue, must be direct and clear without distractions or examples that are not relevant.

I am with Prof. Heidi Owsley writing a book titled "Earthkeeping" where we bring together the analysis of human nature and its relationship to how humans relate to their physical environment. We can not forget that the way one behaves relates directly to the way one thinks.

Another aspect of communicating is honesty. Are we communicating to inform? or are we communicating to convince? or are we communicating to mislead? There are ways one have to express an idea so the reader has to be involved in the process. Dave Levitan in his book "Not A Scientist" focus on the misleading tools and artifacts that people use to mislead. Mainly politicians that use this gimmicks for their political gain. http://www.davelevitan.com/not-a-scientist/ 
Natural science is a complex discipline and can be oversimplified both for good and for bad purposes.

One can talk about human evolution in general which is systematic or in particular which is selective. The systematic approach needs to take into account all particularities of its elements and that makes it complicated. For this approach to be effective the elements in the system have to be organized within categories, take for example an organism the categories would be organs and functions. Humans as organisms have organs (hearts, eyes, lungs, etc.) and functions such as senses (sight, smell, taste, etc.) and motions (grabbing,  locomotion, etc.) Individual organs can also be analyzed as systems when parts of it can be defined, this appears to be a fractal relationship appearing always in the universe.

An interesting philosophical proposition.