|
|
|
|
|
|
by avmich
2694 days ago
|
|
|
> One of the major arguments against this particular attack on oil and coal companies is that those products have vastly benefited society and the average person. That is a very difficult position with which to argue. This is well explained in the article. As soon as Oil Co. understood the cost of externalities in the business, it had a choice - to add the cost of neutralizing to the product (and possibly close the business) or to get sued. Don't see any problem here. What I do see is the problem with the judge - and maybe many judges. |
|
|
Since fuel is taxed, how do you know that isn't enough to compensate for the externalities? I once looked up the estimated costs of global warming according to the National Resources Defense Council and it seemed that using their figures the full cost of gasoline is probably on the order of the price it goes for in Europe. So I think that while Americans aren't paying enough, the true cost is not very high in the overall scheme of things. Certainly not enough to drastically change society and put energy companies out of business.