GreenYes Archives

[GreenYes Home] - [Thread Index] - [Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]


RE: [greenyes] RE: Zero waste and subsidies


Another problem is that subsidies are a political game, and those with better access or more power tend to get more subsidies. You can run into a situation where less powerful market participants (recyclers, renewable energy firms for example) get one crumb of public subsidy for every heaping slice of cake their competitors receive. They may end up in a competitively-worse situation after receiving a subsidy than they were before.

_______________________________
Doug Koplow
Earth Track, Inc.
2067 Massachusetts Avenue - 4th Floor
Cambridge, MA 02140
www.earthtrack.net
Tel: 617/661-4700
Fax: 617/354-0463

CONFIDENTIAL
This message, and all attachments thereto,
is covered by the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C., Sections 2510-2521.
This message is CONFIDENTIAL. If you are
not the intended recipient of this message,
then any retention, dissemination, distribution
or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. Please notify me if you received
this message in error at koplow@no.address,
and then delete it.


>>> "Reindl, John" <Reindl@no.address> 09/10/04 12:28PM >>>
Hi Richard ~

Yes, I understand the argument and also the rationale of getting more money
through subsidies for my interest.

But, this further distorts the marketplace, moving away from the principles
of internalizing the externalities.

I oppose further subsidies -- which are paid for by taxpayers -- and support
eliminating the existing subsidies.

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: richard@no.address [mailto:richard@no.address]
> Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 11:21 AM
> To: Reindl, John; 'Gary Liss'; greenyes
> Subject: Re: [greenyes] RE: Zero waste and subsidies
>
>
> John,
> When I worked on a project like this for the State of California, the
> recycling industry folks were strong supporters of extending
> the tax breaks
> to them rather than eliminating breaks for others. While
> this does make the
> tax structure more complex, rather than more simple, their
> argument was that
> since their markets and pricing were established, this would be the
> equivalent of giving them extra money, which they said they
> would reinvest
> in upgrading their facilities; and that this was better than
> making life
> more difficult for their primary material using competitors.
> Richard Gertman
> Environmental Planning Consultants - A Green Business
> 1885 The Alameda, Suite 120
> San Jose, CA 95126-1732
> 408-249-0691
> richard@no.address
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Reindl, John" <Reindl@no.address>
> To: "'Gary Liss'" <gary@no.address>; "greenyes" <greenyes@no.address>
> Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 6:13 AM
> Subject: [greenyes] RE: Zero waste and subsidies
>
>
> Gary ~
>
> Thanks for sharing this. But, I note that NRC seems to have
> abandoned the
> call for elimination of virgin material subsidies and is
> instead calling for
> subsidies for recycling. Why do you think that this is
> happening? To me, it
> distorts the marketplace even more.
>
> Also, I have not seen NRC, GRRN or Zero Waste call for the use of an
> environmental valuation system to internalize the costs to
> the environment
> of either material extraction/harvesting or for the handling
> of residues.
> Why do you think that these groups aren't picking up on these
> concepts,
> which are in use in other countries?
>
> John
>
> >
> >
> > Amy,
> >
> > I totally agree with you about getting rid of subsidies for
> > wasting. As
> > you probably know, there are excellent reports on that issue at:
> > http://www.grrn.org/subsidies/index.html
> >
> > and
> >
> > http://www.nrc-recycle.org/member/advocacy/policypositions/sub
> > sidiesrpt.pdf
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > At 06:49 PM 9/8/2004, Amy Perlmutter wrote:
> > >Gary:
> > >
> > >I agree with your concept. But I do have one thing to add:
> > getting rid of
> > >subsidies for virgin resources, and working to internalize
> > other external
> > >costs of mining as well as disposal. I personally am not
> > fully supportive
> > >of advance disposal fees< having folks pay for the cost of
> > disposal in the
> > >product. ³Consumers² are already pay for disposal when they
> > dispose of it,
> > >so they¹re paying for it twice. If the true cost of getting
> > the virgin
> > >materials and turning them into product were included in the
> > cost of the
> > >product, and the true cost of disposing of the product were
> > included in
> > >peoples¹ garbage fees (like monitoring the landfill for how
> > ever many years
> > >it¹s needed), then I think we¹d see clearer incentives in
> > the right places.
> > >
> > >Amy
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 18:26:05 -0700
> > > > To: "Peter Anderson" <anderson@no.address>,
> > > > "GreenYes" <greenyes@no.address>
> > > > From: Gary Liss <gary@no.address>
> > > > Subject: Re: [greenyes] Recycling's Own Sustainability
> > > > Message-Id:
> <6.1.2.0.2.20040903181210.02e43998@no.address>
> > > >
> > > > Peter,
> > > >
> > > > I agree with your concerns and believe that the correct
> > way to address the=
> > > > =20
> > > > reported "malaise" of recycling is to re-invigorate our
> > movement to push=20
> > > > for the next generation of policies and programs. That means
> > > encouraging=20
> > > > state and local governments, universities and businesses,
> > to adopt Zero=20
> > > > Waste as a goal, and for them to develop plans to
> > implement those goals.
> > > >
> > > > That means stopping leaking landfills and polluting
> > burners. That means=20
> > > > holding producers fiscally or physically accountable for
> > their products
> > > and=
> > > > =20
> > > > packaging. That means working for the triple-bottom line
> > of economy,=20
> > > > environment and social equity, and working towards an
> > economy that fully=20
> > > > values people, resources and the environment.
> > > >
> > > > I urge all who are interested in working towards Zero
> > Waste in your=20
> > > > community to contact me, or GRRN, to begin to network the
> > leaders of=
> > > > tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > Gary
> >
> > Gary Liss
> > 916-652-7850
> > Fax: 916-652-0485
> > www.garyliss.com
> >
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: greenyes-unsubscribe@no.address
> > For additional commands, e-mail: greenyes-help@no.address
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: greenyes-unsubscribe@no.address
> For additional commands, e-mail: greenyes-help@no.address
>
>
>
>




[GreenYes Home] - [Date Index] - [Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]