Environmental impact tax

Current Economy and Sustainable Development-compatible? GDP growth (at all costs), economic development, inflation ... How concillier the current economy with the environment and sustainable development.
Golgot
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 5
Registration: 21/12/08, 01:35

Environmental impact tax




by Golgot » 21/12/08, 02:11

Hello,

I am looking (at first) to establish a list of criteria that must be taken into account to measure the impact on the environment of the products we consume.

The idea is to find a "method of calculating" the environmental cost of what we consume based (approximately) on the idea that the environmental impact of a product results from the impacts of the products. constituents the final product ...

I need your participation to help me develop this "method" (that's a big word ...) in order for example to tax a product of such an amount, to choose one product rather than another. .

Okay, let's go:

1: The geographic origin of the product
- in general, the further a product comes, the stronger its environmental impact

2: Its packaging - packaging
- packaging may be superfluous
- its composition may be unsuitable, ex: favor paper packaging over plastic packaging

3: Its lifespan
- ex: a low consumption bulb lasts much longer than a conventional bulb
- when the state offers a bonus for scrapping a car, you have to rebuild another car, and there the eco balance sheet plunges ...

4: Alternative products available
- Drink tap water rather than buying bottles

5: The ecological impact of the product components
- Even if a product is assembled near my home, the elements constituting this product can have a very negative ecological balance ...

6: Resources required to manufacture the product
- This point includes the human, material and energy needs necessary for the production of a good: example of the energy-consuming production tool (flytox)

7: the underlying impact on the consumption of the product:
ex: the necessary infrastructure: I am on an uninhabited island, to run my sedan, we have to tarmac roads, if I have an all terrain, a simple path is enough (oops !! it will make some react but I have no other examples at the moment ...)

ex2: A battery watch involves regularly buying batteries

8: Sharing its use
- favor a product that can be used by several people

9: The energy efficiency of the product
- eco lamps, fuel efficient cars ...

10: Single / multiple use (flytox)
- ex: disposable tableware vs classic tableware

11: The quality of the product (flytox)
- ex: PVC garden chairs not protected from UV which become "self-breaking" after a summer in the sun
- ex: Poor quality & poorly finished clothes which quickly become unfortunate
(This criterion could be linked to the criterion # 3 Lifespan)

12: Recycling / Reuse / Destruction of the product
eg a glass bottle or a plastic bottle, which is easier to recycle?
ex: What energy is necessary to eliminate a product?

13: The dangerousness of the product:
ex: Presence of toxic components (cells, batteries ...)

14: The cost of using the product:
The use or the use of a product can induce a demand for additional energy
e.g. the purchase of a car will lead to consumption of petrol, oil, antifreeze, tires ...
Last edited by Golgot the 02 / 01 / 09, 17: 56, 15 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 21/12/08, 13:05

Hello golgot

Well the list! 8)
For the lifetime, I will add the notion that the product is made for not be reusable. It was designed for the sole purpose of being disposable, "wasted" in principle. This is achieved in different ways by the choice of materials designed to self-destruct, damage quickly etc ...

Examples:
- disposable plastic cutlery.
- PVC garden chairs not protected from UV which become "self-breaking" after a summer in the sun.
- Spare parts almost as expensive as the whole product (small electronics, rechargeable batteries, batteries etc ...)

For the tax aspect, it would certainly be a very good thing. But we must be careful with its delicate implementation. It will be necessary that its amount increases gradually over time (over X years) that all industry, agriculture etc ... have time to adapt. Because our entire economy is based on waste. It's not about creating millions of unemployed people and the wars that go with it. :frown:

A+
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
Golgot
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 5
Registration: 21/12/08, 01:35




by Golgot » 21/12/08, 18:46

Thanks to Flytox for its proposals.
I added these new criteria at the end of the list.


and 12!
...
Last edited by Golgot the 27 / 12 / 08, 22: 04, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 21/12/08, 19:10

don't have enough tax? you want even more?

good idea to tax products that come from far away! It wouldn't be easier to stop taxing everyone who tries to work in France

all the right way to save energy, raw material or less pollute require work: and as long as the workforce is overtaxed we will continue to do nothing with us and to buy what is done n ' no matter how far away ...
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 21/12/08, 23:34

Hello chatelot16

No, taxes are not a creed ... : Mrgreen: But it can be effective, as our world only recognizes the cash motor, it is to speak with a universal language / tool from the youngest to the oldest while passing from the most powerful to the most destitute. We must concern everyone, producers and consumers of anything. If everyone is pulling in the same direction, we should achieve some efficiency in the medium term. : Mrgreen:
A+
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.

[Eugène Ionesco]

http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
Golgot
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 5
Registration: 21/12/08, 01:35




by Golgot » 23/12/08, 14:14

compare a garment made in China to a garment made in France, both intended for the French market and try to attribute a "tax" to them:

- the Chinese sweater comes from much further (criterion n ° 1)
- the packaging of Chinese clothing is "less" ecological (criterion n ° 2) (it is my job to process Chinese packaging)
- the lifespan of this garment often leaves something to be desired when it comes from China, even if in recent years we have started to see better quality garments ...
- criterion n ° 5: I sometimes find lead in Chinese sachets ...

it's still a lot of "malus" for Chinese clothing.
To say that we have to tax more Chinese or on the contrary lower taxes in French, there is not really the bp ...
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 23/12/08, 15:20

Hello Golgot

Another "possible" criterion.
There are machines that are not at all optimized to limit consumables (water, gas, electricity, raw materials, etc.)
The only goal is to make a low sale price, too bad if the cost of use explodes. In the sales system and documentation, everything is done to hide the real costs.
Example: Kodak M35 IM film processing machine
Water consumption from 700 to 1400 liters / day whether we use it or not. All this to save money, a tempo and a solenoid valve .... lamentable :frown:
A+
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.

[Eugène Ionesco]

http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Economy and finance, sustainability, growth, GDP, ecological tax systems"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 149 guests