Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

For topics unrelated to bush walking or to the forums.

Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Fri 07 Oct, 2016 7:07 am

2x40 minute videos. Grab a wine, strap yourself in, enjoy the doco. Let me know what you think.

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2015/11/pricing-planet-151119111851963.html
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Sun 09 Oct, 2016 7:55 am

Hmmm, I'm a silent inside. One hand glad my rambling are on the money, on the other;....I am silent. Perhaps like the planet will be in the near future.

Our lives are controlled by politicians, CEO's and bankers. Yes there is an upside, but also a significant down. Your superannuation, what we are all encouraged to participate in; your life's saving for most and your life's future took a hit in 07-08; and for what. The politicians, CEO's and bankers played a card. Greed and profits in the US housing market. Now it seems the environment is the latest, and perhaps the last round. Now wonder they are looking to space. But haven't mastered making water and air, so Mars is BS for all of us. Plus I don't want to go anyway, I like it here.

Perhaps we need to move back to smaller communities, smaller markets, creating more local infrastructure and jobs? More community? There certainly would be less transportation and price fixing by globalisation of monopoly players. Perhaps we need a better political system that is not derived from a class system, and controlled by two a party preferred. Perhaps we need a new religion, Mother Earth; she is here at least and bigger than all of us. Just watch any natural disaster from drought to flood to see we are at her mercy. She already provides all, its call life to us humans who are capable of some much love. Perhaps we need a leader, and a society that values life, love, family, and community over money, money, money. A disease designed, supplied, and promoted by politicians, CEO's and bankers. We are all addicts, we all know it, and we all need to detox and get clean.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 5:28 am

you know I once was a smoker. I watched my grandfather die of emphysema, and then his eldest son, and I smoked every bit as much or more than them. Just like the quit smoking adds nowdays I'd stand outside in the cold, accept the persistent coughing, and endured the growing social leper feeling I had being a smoker. I felt the government was happy for me to smoke as I contributed in tax, but also played a card they had a moral responsibility to help me give up. It seemed the tobacco companies were allowed to drug me and go about their business, and for as long as chose to smoke all were happy.
We have now the same problem with sugar, except the government is doing nothing but spinning out about obesity, diabetes, and counting the cost on the health budgets. The food companies are growing fat in sales, the people are aware, but to a degree quite powerless to fight the volumes of sugar in everything, and may go some way to explaining some of the social ills we have with depression, suicide, and drugs.

Perhaps a solution is simply tax. They taxed the tobacco companies to help cover the health bill; so an easy way to stop obesity is turn a $1.50can of coke into a $7 can of coke. McDonalds is already expansive, but taxing it so its 4 to 5 times price would help everyone but McDonnalds. If these companies wish to poison people's body with fat and sugar, just make sure they contribute or clean up their act. I feel for the smokers except when they through their buts out the window; but to be trapped by a product with an addictive drug to the body at the crazy prices of today is just bad. But to get of the drug one has endure the process, you learn a bit along the way about yourself.

Now consider the same for the planet.
Example: Why does a motor vehicle tire only last 50K km. Why does't it last the life of the vehicle? Why doesn't the tire manufacturer take them back, melt, and re-mould new ones. Why have tires basically stayed the same for 60 years. Why do we have mounds of tires as big as suburbs. Greed and profit perhaps, while the Earth and consumer pays. What if companies were allowed to have their way, but a tires was now taxed to $700 instead of $100. Yes, some people would still buy but most would not. So this encouraged companies to stop sitting on the status quo, and get green, use the supposed research and technology from countless race car tires, and just get better. The up side for them is the greener they are, the less tax they are subject too.
This whole application of taxing products across the board from oil to plastics, buildings and building products, paper, foods, including ingredients like Palm Oil in shampoos can be applied in a sliding scale in years similar to cigarettes have been. Taxed specifically relating to how much impact that product has on the earth from the start to finish process, or if its reusable. I dare say the balance in it would be the abomination of income tax and GST. The politicians, COE's, and banks all love growth and consumption. Well perhaps here it is, and hold them truly acceptable for their actions.

A punchless tire, imagine if it lasted 150 000km or the life of the vehicle.
tyre1.jpg
tyre1.jpg (66.73 KiB) Viewed 3455 times
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby GTL » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 8:26 am

Talking to yourself is the first sign of madness. Just sayin
GTL
Nothofagus gunnii
Nothofagus gunnii
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed 10 Aug, 2016 1:12 am
Region: Australia

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 6:13 pm

Perhaps, but tell me, who listens to the the dynamic duo that are governing our country into the ground? And furthermore, what new idea has either side had that is not a rehash of the old.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby photohiker » Mon 10 Oct, 2016 6:33 pm

There are more issues about tyres than how long they last.

Rubber hardens with age. If a tyre lasts for the life of a car it will be rock hard by then, and the reason the car will be in the wreckers will because hardened tyres have poor traction and the car will skid off the road. Tyres need to be soft to have compliance with the road and gain traction.
Michael
User avatar
photohiker
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 3005
Joined: Sun 17 May, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: Adelaide, dreaming up where to go next.

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Tue 11 Oct, 2016 7:53 pm

That may be true, or it may be what the manufacturers want you to believe. When I was an apprentice my Teck teacher who was ex major Australian paint manufacturer said they could make paint last 25 years if they wanted to, but its not good for sales. 4lt cost $4 to make including the tin and retailed for $27; and that was 28 years ago.
My returned staffer tells me the battery he runs in his car wholesales for $23. He bought if from a mate in the auto industry who cut him a good deal before my staffer got a job at a battery wholesaler. His mate sold it to him for $70. If it was bought on the open market than it retails for $120.

The current system is broken, and leans towards slow advancements and ridiculous profits with no or little responsibility by companies/manufacturers for the impact their products has on the environment. A sliding tax scale linked to environmental impact would certainly make them consider their products and their actions. If the consumer is not paying GST or income tax, than they have more money to spend, and feel good about their work-tax relationship. This would also reduce tax evasion as all products one consumes carries a environmental tax. Some small, some much bigger. If the manufacturer wants to increase sales, then they need to work on their product to make it greener so it becomes subject to less tax and hence cheaper, and more appealing to the consumer. If the product vanishes, it would not be the first and I'm sure we can all survive. There would be jobs created in regard to green tax inspectors, to stamp out smoke and mirror green BS we have nowadays with many products.
Take acrylic paints. Marketed early in the piece as more environmental due to water clean up. Now it longevity, durability, and fade resistant. Water based paints, plastic paint came about because of OH&S concerns with users exposure to turpentine; and perhaps future litigation concerns for the manufacturer. However, it was also cheaper to manufacturer as water was cheaper to obtain than mineral turps. So in the end you still have tin of chemicals of which time has not disclosed real health benefits to humans or the environment, but its looking better. Its safer to use but also cheaper to make. And at best only good for 10 years externally generally. I'd argue if it lasted longer, people would still repaint as a change in colour is good for the soul. It would also be cheaper, however the manufacturer still pays a good tax due to water and chemical disposal loads on the environment.

Back to the tire, even if rubber hardening with age and thus loosing its grip. Then why still aren't the manufacturers melting and remoulding tires. Why does a rubber used else where in a vehicle, in suspension components, or engine mounts potentially last Ok for 10 years.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby photohiker » Tue 11 Oct, 2016 10:10 pm

newhue wrote:Back to the tire, even if rubber hardening with age and thus loosing its grip. Then why still aren't the manufacturers melting and remoulding tires. Why does a rubber used else where in a vehicle, in suspension components, or engine mounts potentially last Ok for 10 years.


The reason rubber lasts elsewhere is that as it ages it will perform without failing even though it hardens. There are many rubber components in a car and if you inspect them even after a few years you will see that they are deteriorating. Think of the shock and sway bar bushes, the spring mounts, etc. The reason the tires are more important is that as they harden, they are more likely to fail or lose grip and they fundamentally alter the grip of the car on the road leading to accidents. There is a difference between tire losing grip (or failing) and a shock absorber making a knock sound but still working. Another common failure is the rubber connection between the petrol filler and the fuel tank.

Old worn and hardened tires can be recycled. One of the issues is that there are far more tires than capable uses in place for them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubberized_asphalt
Michael
User avatar
photohiker
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 3005
Joined: Sun 17 May, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: Adelaide, dreaming up where to go next.

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Wed 12 Oct, 2016 6:23 am

Ok fair enough, if they have life of 5 or 6 years than so be it. I'm still not convinced it is still not somewhat related to turnover and sales. I heard though a tire guy say they won't fit 6 year old tires. If they made road side guard rails instead of steel cables or arco railing, coated a steel poles inners for telegraph poles, made roads, bike paths, driveways from old tires then this would be how they could reduce their environment tax to some degree. Surely half an old tire could go into a new one though?

I have say after Bathurst, if 35 cars have to have run 24 tires each to complete one day of racing, surely all this fun and research can do better than just grip. One race in the racing calendar, and that is just the supercars. The earth and us get poor value from those guys. Entertainment yes, value limited, and 0 for sustainability.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby GTL » Sat 15 Oct, 2016 10:04 pm

TYRES. With a Y. Noohoo. Just sayin
GTL
Nothofagus gunnii
Nothofagus gunnii
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed 10 Aug, 2016 1:12 am
Region: Australia

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby DarrenM » Sun 16 Oct, 2016 6:13 am

newhue wrote:you know I once was a smoker. I watched my grandfather die of emphysema, and then his eldest son, and I smoked every bit as much or more than them. Just like the quit smoking adds nowdays I'd stand outside in the cold, accept the persistent coughing, and endured the growing social leper feeling I had being a smoker. I felt the government was happy for me to smoke as I contributed in tax, but also played a card they had a moral responsibility to help me give up. It seemed the tobacco companies were allowed to drug me and go about their business, and for as long as chose to smoke all were happy.
We have now the same problem with sugar, except the government is doing nothing but spinning out about obesity, diabetes, and counting the cost on the health budgets. The food companies are growing fat in sales, the people are aware, but to a degree quite powerless to fight the volumes of sugar in everything, and may go some way to explaining some of the social ills we have with depression, suicide, and drugs.

Perhaps a solution is simply tax. They taxed the tobacco companies to help cover the health bill; so an easy way to stop obesity is turn a $1.50can of coke into a $7 can of coke. McDonalds is already expansive, but taxing it so its 4 to 5 times price would help everyone but McDonnalds. If these companies wish to poison people's body with fat and sugar, just make sure they contribute or clean up their act. I feel for the smokers except when they through their buts out the window; but to be trapped by a product with an addictive drug to the body at the crazy prices of today is just bad. But to get of the drug one has endure the process, you learn a bit along the way about yourself.

The problem lies with the individual that knows the healthy alternatives but continues to blame the product, company, government, dealer etc and keeps on using.

Higher taxing pushes the problem along the assembly line to healthcare. Sugar.... reduce your intake and don't blame companies for killing you early. Same goes for smoking. All the info is out there but we like conspiracy and blame.

Knowledge is power so school up and take the responsible approach.
DarrenM
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Tue 19 Oct, 2010 7:10 pm
Location: Sydney
Region: New South Wales
Gender: Male

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Sun 16 Oct, 2016 7:12 pm

huh you lost me? Guess when I spend the weekend at the beach picking up plastic bottles, beer bottles, soft drink cans, zip ties etc I should school up and say not my problem, and just walk past it. The dead turtle on the beach not my problem either? I'm blaming no one. However I am saying the system we have is fixed towards politicians, CEO's, and Banks to keep us in a system where the environment has no value. Well except for exploitation. By taxing the maker of the can, the bottle, etc significantly higher on their product then what they are now encourages them to be more proactive with the aftermath of their product. That is if they wanted to reduce their tax and retail price. Yes people should not litter, but to charge $4 for a bottle of water with a total cost of 25c including the water, bottle, cap, label, and box is perhaps irresponsible, especially with no regard once that plastic bottle is empty. But hey if the system is great, the system is great. I'll walk past the rubbish next time knowing I should take more responsibility.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby DarrenM » Sun 16 Oct, 2016 8:22 pm

newhue wrote:huh you lost me? Guess when I spend the weekend at the beach picking up plastic bottles, beer bottles, soft drink cans, zip ties etc I should school up and say not my problem, and just walk past it. The dead turtle on the beach not my problem either? I'm blaming no one. However I am saying the system we have is fixed towards politicians, CEO's, and Banks to keep us in a system where the environment has no value. Well except for exploitation. By taxing the maker of the can, the bottle, etc significantly higher on their product then what they are now encourages them to be more proactive with the aftermath of their product. That is if they wanted to reduce their tax and retail price. Yes people should not litter, but to charge $4 for a bottle of water with a total cost of 25c including the water, bottle, cap, label, and box is perhaps irresponsible, especially with no regard once that plastic bottle is empty. But hey if the system is great, the system is great. I'll walk past the rubbish next time knowing I should take more responsibility.

I only quoted the section on smoking and sugar. It had nothing to do with picking up rubbish on the beach. Maybe reread the quote and the reply in context. People think because they buy cigarettes or sugar packed food that it's someone else's fault they have health issues. There are so many healthy products out there. Go buy them and eat fruit and veggies, don't smoke ....pretty simple really. Take yourself out of the conspiracy loop by taking control.
I don't mean you personally but people that hate the politics of it all. If the bull is raging, climb over the fence and out of harms way.
DarrenM
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Tue 19 Oct, 2010 7:10 pm
Location: Sydney
Region: New South Wales
Gender: Male

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Mon 17 Oct, 2016 6:06 am

Sorry as I though you were saying take responsibility and stop blaming everyone. Absolutely the bull is raging, and I can take myself over the fence, but I ask why should I have to. Our fruit and veggies are coated in chemicals for storage, colour, colour fastness, blemish free, a 12 month season, and basically taste like cardboard. Why? It's us and the environment getting smashed, and for what, a carefully developed marketing programme by coles and wollies so the CEO's can dream of more sales and supposedly keep prices down. Its what we asked for right.....have you ever been asked by coles and wollies what YOU want?
Why can't I not vote? I get fined if I don't, my vote gets the preferential treatment to a party I didn't vote for, and then if the leader is perceived as on the nose, the winning party change the leader. And unsurprisingly I have heard my bro in law in federal liberal state how stupid and ignorant people are for invalid votes. So hoodwinked by the parties in-house in-bread ideology to ever think people are disillusioned. It's no conspiracy, its out there in everyone face.

I don't know about you but I don't feel I have to jump fences for greener pastures, I shouldn't have to. We have nirvana right here on earth, but run by second or rate people in a system designed for their personal wealth to grow. I feel I need to take responsibility and start talking. We need people for people, and most importantly for our beautiful home called Earth.

It seems no one has watched the Doc's. Or isn't willing to comment. I guess kind of why we are where we are. Ol Malcolm and his mates must be laughing all the way to the bank.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby DarrenM » Mon 17 Oct, 2016 5:40 pm

newhue wrote:Sorry as I thought you were saying take responsibility and stop blaming everyone. Absolutely the bull is raging, and I can take myself over the fence, but I ask why should I have to.

I kinda was saying take responsibility and stop blaming everyone....and why should you have to? Because that's the only way to make change. I rage for the same reasons you do and am well aware of the usual, big company, big pharma, big politics blah blah blah.

On the fruit thing. Correct. What can we do? Start a veggie garden at home. I live in a unit with no grass or garden but we bought large pots and grow herbs and a small amount of basic greens. Sure the bugs eat some and it's not large enough for any decent production but it's something very small that makes us feel as though we are making an effort. All of our food waste goes into a simple worm farm which produces a tiny amount of fertiliser that goes back into the pots. Is it going to change the world? Probably not.

Look for a local community garden. Most areas will have one and if they don't, you might be surprised the local council/government will help you set one up. If I buy fruit and veggies I know that the best ones come from local gardeners I pass on my way home. The imperfections are rife but the taste and price can't be beat. If I do buy from the large chains, I buy the basics.

One day our aim is to own in a rural setting and take this to the next level with a well managed and hopefully somewhat sustainable plan. I have friends doing this as we speak and all the info is out there. At this level you do make a difference.

The sugar thing is an interesting topic too and a tangent but relative to the whole debate. I have friends and family that are morbidly obese. It's horrible to watch the decline of health and the equally disturbing decline of attitude towards others as though it's someone else's fault, from doctors, government, the local store that sells them junk food etc and then finally the "I'm overweight because I have underlying health problems" line.

These same people were smoking, drinking and eating all the wrong foods knowingly and never really caring about staying active. I will lose some of them as early as their 50's without fail. It's hard to watch. Why blame the food? Like smoking....People know it is going to kill them.

newhue wrote:I don't know about you but I don't feel I have to jump fences for greener pastures, I shouldn't have to.
The only way anything will ever change is by not feeding the machine that you dislike. Take control of the small things first and by "schooling up", join local community groups, get involved with your local member etc. It's not about huge disruptive changes to your life....just small ones. The less power you give the less power they have and there are perhaps billions of people on the planet wanting to do the same thing.....there is where the changes can and will happen.

Here's a good example of people wanting to make a difference and doing it well - http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/sydney- ... rage-99081

I do understand what you are trying to say and the challenge of change is daunting considering the quagmire of politics to wade through but there are many options and alternatives. Talking about it is a start for sure.
DarrenM
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Tue 19 Oct, 2010 7:10 pm
Location: Sydney
Region: New South Wales
Gender: Male

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Mon 17 Oct, 2016 6:47 pm

I can understand where you are coming from, and its good for the individual's souls and footprint. But if we are to save this planet from snuffing out like a snow flake over a fire we need a much much bigger approach.
If coles or wollies were taxed hard on their fruit and veg because they are the ones squeezing the farmer to use chemicals to create the perfect veg or fruit for their sales; I'm confident they would easily work out a marketing program to bring us all back to blemishes, and seasonal fruit. On one hand coles and wollies would cry fowl form lost sales, but on the other if the consumer has more money as they are paying no income tax, it allows them to consume more, however just seasonally. Yes the people would have to suck it up, along with the Ceo's, but the planet would be able to take a breath of fresh air. Banks can still make money, politicians can still pay the bills.
But the farmer would actually benefit by growing a product as natural possible because his damage, or taxable impact on the earth is very low due to minimal chemical and fossil fuel usage. He could sell to an open market at almost 100% tax free if his smart. Locally would work best for him, as he, coles, and wollies would be subject to a fossil fuel tax if they transport product far and wide. The power to reduce their tax burden is entirely up to them by how greener they become, and creates proper ingenuity through better practices to increase profit from being more sustainable in an earths sense. It's all about possible profits and saving the planet. Chemical companies may feel left out, but their challenge is have less impact on the earth, air, and water. There will be a need I presume to keep various pests at bay, otherwise will you loose sleep if they became extinct. The trucking - transport - motor industry need to pull their socks up as they will all be subject to the tax on a sliding scale. Perhaps they get it together and have a better look at some of those old plans and ideas being kept in the safe for years.

In the above Doco, it is suggested a third party, I presume a bank, buys a chunk of land then sells "environment credits" to Ceo's so they can do what they want to another given piece of land. Trouble is we will have one abused bit of land, and another that may or may not become up for abuse in the future. One example given in the Doc is single species eucalyptus forrest being promoted as saving the amazon and its biodiversity, so hence become a credit for the destruction of other parts of the Amazon. In short, CEO's buy credits so they can clear the forrest. However the eucalypts are nothing more than plantation forrest waiting to ripen. If this Doco is accurate as the latest thinking on saving the planet from Banks, CEO's, and Politicians then we are certainly doomed.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Tue 18 Oct, 2016 7:51 pm

In the documentary post 1 this is how I understand it. Not yet here in Australia, but perhaps not far off as we have elements of it. Say we take a parcel of land, 10 000 Sqm of remnant bushland.

A developer wants to clear 5000 Sqm of land for a new housing estate. For him to do so he pays money to a third party to buy credits to compensate for the land he wants to clear. Those credits are issued by ? who has purchased the land, or the rights to sell the credits. It’s not clear in the Doco but it could be a bank, and investment company, a superannuation fund perhaps. The idea of this third party holding land is in theory anyway, to assure biodiversity of native flora and fauna for future generations. I assume the cost of the credits is added to the cost of the lots eventually up for sale in the estate.

So 5000sqm the trees come down. Banks have lent the developer the money, councils get their planning fees, and keep an eye on if things as they are building a new and dynamic future for the people.

The developer designs a typical modern estate and packs as many houses into his 5000sqm of land. Because its a small development there is little or no requirement by council to provide community open space. There will be some environmental and renewable energy requirement however. These environmental requirements are taken care of by planting lomandras around the storm water intakes drains that lead to the local creek. Dressed up nicely with gravel because its cheap and maintenance fee, they are designed to slow the water as it comes down the roads curbing before hitting the drains. To utilise space efficiently, the developer builds these pits partially on the footpath as to not clutter the road. Perhaps an up side for the planet, however certainly not marketed, is the lomandras collect litter off the street before making its way to the creek. However few ever clean the litter out of the lomandras, though I’m sure the odd good samaritan will. The developer is also required to plant 2 native trees on the footpath outside each house to forfeit obligations.
The renewable energy requirements are sorted with a caveat over construction for LED internal lighting, a solar hot water system, sarking or insulation, and if the developer is feeling particularly green perhaps solar. But the solar will be a choice left to home owners and the builders, its another $7000 upgrade on the standard coal power build price.
The developer is lucky on this parcel of land, because it is a large rectangle, if he narrows the street size to the permissible minimum 3.5m wide, he can squeeze in 10 houses on 400sm lots with a 30sqm footpath. The houses are modern. No or small soffits, easy maintenance painted render, though some have a brick wall feature. They have .5m to 1m spacing between neighbouring boundary which is gravelled and fenced. And pretty much take up the whole block however a few have a 2m wide patch of grass out the back that runs the 10m width of the house. They have air-conditioning, and space for one car in a car port. The landscaping is mostly with exotic plants. The developer can easily create a controlled manicured garden that gives the place a green feel.

The houses are sold, a bargain at $450K with half taking the solar option, and people move in. Early in the piece as the neighbourhood fills up many of the native plants on the footpath are pulled out. The streets are narrow and with only one car port per house the owner needs to park another 1, 2, or more cars, so the footpath is it. The windows are often kept closed because they can hear the neighbours if they open them. So the air conditioner gets a work out summer and winter.
The owners notice a few birds around, mostly secondary predatory birds like magpie, curawong, noisy miner, butcher birds. They all come from the other bushland a bit further down the road, however for a few astute ones, they notice virtually nothing inhabits their exotic garden.
Overall though, the people are happy enough. Life is busy, they are in a home, and they are hopeful stage 2 will kick of in the future to hopefully add value to their new house 30km from the CBD.

What an outcome. For humanity, nature, and the sustainability of both.
As the Doco asked, will stage 2 ever come up for sale? Will those credits on the remnant uncleared 5000sqm be transferred to another block elsewhere? Perhaps out of sight out of mind?



In 199? I heard an interview with a young architect submitting his plans and ideas for the 2000 Sydney Olympic Village. A competition was being held looking for a winning design to eventually show case to the world and its athletes on how clever and switched on we are here in Australia.

His building was high rise, I can’t recall how many floors but lets say for this example they were spacious, almost or equal to a low set house on 400sqm. So that would be 1 footprint that could house 10 houses on 10 floors. There could be 11 for a gym, 12 for a social entertainment area, 13 for a pool, and 13A as a roof top garden. A ground floor for cafe, newsagents, etc, and -1, -2. -3 for car parks.
This architect suggested to cool the building so its reliance on energy sucking air conditioning could be significantly reduced, recycled water was to be used to create a water fall down the internal cavity of the building. This drags air in and cools it with water as it falls and also creates an ambiance. Yes it was a hollow building which also allowed natural light to penetrate down into the core of it. Now imagine having breakfast and taking that in. On the outside plants were used to provide shade for the buildings external surface. Solar panels could also be used in a way to create interesting designs and capture the movement of the sun around the building. A bonus of the plants was they provided habitat for various birds, insects, and the like. And somehow and I wish I could recall, recycled water was used to keep them watered as well. I also imagine that water fall could create energy and discrete wind generators could be positioned and fashioned around the building or on top.

Now lets say we do away with what the Doco is suggesting. We don’t need questionable credits issued by questionable entities on our precious remnant forrest, here or anywhere else in the world.

Lets say on the 10 000sqm of land, 4 of these towers were built. That’s 40 homes instead of 20, and 8400Sm of bushland left alone. However roads are not considered. But lets be really funky and build the roads one way, but two story as to utilise the footprint. These would link the building to the normal road network. Consider the first few levels would be surrounded by trees to add another dimension to it. I’d sure love having a cool drink on the verandah watching the sunset at tree top level.

Lets say the developer has a choice, build something like the architects design and benefit from significantly reduced environment tax imposed on him due to his efforts in creating sustainable living with minimal impact. Or he could clear the whole bock and go traditional, but pay a hefty price. Lets say because he had built a work of art that he wanted 500K per unit. He makes more profit but pays less tax. And I sure know which housing estate I’d like to live in. However as with all markets, if he charges to much he will suffer and people would look for other development doing similar or better things.

It’s just an idea. A brave new world. But one that starts slowly and grows each year just like cigarette tax has done over the years. It’s not excluding anyone, rather ask them to respect the planet that sustains them, and puts a value on something we only have one of. Mother Earth.

I’m just kicking this around, love to hear your thoughts.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Fri 21 Oct, 2016 4:03 pm

I have no idea what Western Australia "green grow plan" entails, but the link suggests nothing to do with the saving the environment. I bet there is plenty of jobs and growth, and all sorts of good stuff for humans to make cash. Meanwhile the planet takes another cut.

https://support.birdlife.org.au/emailviewonwebpage.aspx?erid=5057468&trid=b81758cd-6f12-4b58-b59e-623334c3bec0
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Sat 22 Oct, 2016 7:00 am

So if companies, entities manufactured and endlessly worked on for nothing more than to make profits should not pay for society than I'd like to hear why.

Sent my local councillor and State School an email with pictures indicating the amount of litter from the school car park making its way down easement/fire break/water course towards the local creek. All the time the litter being mulched by councils grass slashers and harder to pick up. And as they may know plastic takes 100 to 1000 years to breakdown depending if its in the sun, and eventually all the littler makes it way to Moreton Bay. I asked if the cherubs could pick it up as it was their litter and they do little last week before holidays. No reply, from either.

So I did this over the holiday period
rubbish.tiff
rubbish.tiff (679.06 KiB) Viewed 3034 times


Once back at school I sent another email suggesting they were disappointing, and its not hard to reply in the age if instant global communication. Perhaps given there are kangaroos in the bushland next the school they could try and encourage the roos to graze on school lands to ignight the wonder of nature in children. Maybe for a school project they could look at how to catch the litter before th creek, plant out a weed invested water course/drain immediately after their immaculately manicured school grounds. As all the jobs and growth taught on that side of the fence will amount to little if you abuse this side if the fence. But I heard nothing again. I checked email addresses and it appears a new head master has been appointed, so sent him all the emails hoping for something.......silence. So now I pick up the rubbish and chuck it over the fence into the school grounds. Get about half an Aldi bag a week.

creek.jpg
creek.jpg (194.85 KiB) Viewed 3034 times


So if politicians, head masters, children, mums and dads appear not to be concerned regarding litter in the car park and the surrounding environment; then why do we all have have pay. Well that is if the councils even bothers to pick it up, and we will leave the cost to us all in regard to the environments health alone just for now.
The overwhelming amount of litter I picked up was plastic. Bottles, chip packets, biscuit inner trays, straws, plastic bags etc. Now remember when McDonalds had polystyrene packaging and due to public outcry regarding litter they went to paper. The government missed an opportunity there because McDonalds did it on their own. But just say we had this environment tax I keep mentioning, these faceless companies would be chipping in for the clean up or rehabilitation cost of their product. Not the people. The people still need to not litter but from what I have seen from the city to the mountain top, along the plains, through the desert, and across the creeks human litter. If companies paid a tax holding them responsible for after sales responsibility, their left over packaging and its impact on the environmet then perhaps they would pressure chemical companies to come up with something more sustainable that what we have. I believe Coke fought against a 10c return recycling fee for their bottles. Why? Faceless coke loose a little bit of profit? The said it would affect sales, how? But Coke must supply 90% of beverages in this country, this does not exclude the smaller players from the same tax however. And the gutless politicians said OK because coke perhaps threatened to ? The environment gets to accept another million+ bottles a year; and then there is the 13 teaspoons of sugar to deal with and societies addiction to treats and sugar. Oh and the diabetes, obesity and struggling health system. Why should the people have to pay tax, and the faceless companies with their poly and banking mates say cheers, suckers.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby GTL » Sat 22 Oct, 2016 11:25 am

newhue wrote:So now I pick up the rubbish and chuck it over the fence into the school grounds. Get about half an Aldi bag a week.



:shock: That's littering! You should stop that, bad for the environment and all that :roll:
GTL
Nothofagus gunnii
Nothofagus gunnii
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed 10 Aug, 2016 1:12 am
Region: Australia

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Sun 23 Oct, 2016 6:56 am

thanks for the encouragement.
Don't worry though, the school groundsman will mulch it out of eye sight next time he mows, he picked it up from the council's approach.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Mon 24 Oct, 2016 3:19 pm

Perhaps any given off ramp in Australia, 2 weeks after it was last mowed, goes for some 150m and the same amount of crap is on the inside curb as well. I'd much rather live in a society where companies are taxed on their products impact on the environment. Almost every product eventually ends up as land fill basically, or litter that you and I and the environment pay to have picked up, mowed, or just left behind. It predicted by 2050 every sea bird on the planet will have plastic of some sort in it stomach, pretty cool hey. Just think of how advanced we would be if companies spent their time developing ways to make their product have less impact on earth so they could reduct their tax exposure.

h1.JPG
h1.JPG (205.54 KiB) Viewed 2895 times

h2.JPG
h2.JPG (165.05 KiB) Viewed 2895 times

h3.JPG
h3.JPG (181.99 KiB) Viewed 2895 times
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby newhue » Wed 26 Oct, 2016 6:07 am

I watch the views tick over....no one comets. Guess few or none are interested in companies paying for polluting the earth as we pay far to much for their highly profitable products made in china. Must be happy with the past 100 years of how its done and looking forward to the next 100 hey. I'm starting to regret my children future. The haves and have nots will only get more polarised. People will only become more self centred trying to etch out their little piece of living, and believe they have freedom when intact they have little.
I did have ideas on how reclaim the first Australians pride and save a savaged race of people from the doldrums of european *&%$#!. If you think that is all bollocks, just imaging standing an a head land and the white sales in the distance were aliens. They came, and changed your family, friends, and whole social network irreversibly. Destroyed the education, financial, health, and food networks that your relied on, then made you live totally foreign to you like under ground. Introduced you to a drug you had never seen before but eased the pain; ask yourself, in 226 years would you be interested in joining in and being Alien?
I have a way to significantly improve the welfare system for all, and the bourdon on the country, but it seems no one is interested. And I have mentioned companies purposely loading products with sugar that are plainly having great effect on society, and a way to be fair to them and the consumer.

But it appears I am out their on my own. A weirdo who talks a lot of *&%$#!. Just another internet keyboard hero. I heard the original innervation chanter himself Mr Turnbull suggesting more land clearing for more housing to solve the housing crises last night. 10 out of 10 for that one; the gravy train of lazy thinking, or its all gods will, is fuelled up and racing to the bottom.
I had hoped to spark enough interest that I could get 500 supporters to develop a new political party. One based on a new era of technology, direct democracy and individuals input to work out to, then build an alternative path to the labour - liberal boof head - boso circus we have. Guess not. Can't even get comment of a new tax system that eliminates personal income tax and loads it onto companies who have no responsibility for their products impact on the earth, either rom the start of the end. So be it.

I'll let you good folk enjoy the forum. Happy trails, take care. May good heath prevail.
newhue
Athrotaxis cupressoides
Athrotaxis cupressoides
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue 28 Apr, 2015 6:19 am
Location: Brisbane
Region: Queensland

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby Nuts » Wed 26 Oct, 2016 3:05 pm

Hang in there hue. Agreement doesn't make for a long winded reaction, don't expect too much.
坚果
User avatar
Nuts
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 7469
Joined: Sat 05 Apr, 2008 12:22 pm
Region: Tasmania

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby GPSGuided » Wed 26 Oct, 2016 3:36 pm

Here's a question. Who still use gift wrapping paper?
Just move it!
User avatar
GPSGuided
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 6210
Joined: Mon 13 May, 2013 2:37 pm
Location: Sydney
Region: New South Wales

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby Nuts » Wed 26 Oct, 2016 6:00 pm

Well! I Was collecting plastic shopping bags.. :oops:

(corporate responsibility, charging a few cents for them, doesn't seem to be working well there?)
坚果
User avatar
Nuts
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 7469
Joined: Sat 05 Apr, 2008 12:22 pm
Region: Tasmania

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby GTL » Wed 26 Oct, 2016 6:49 pm

Yeah, keep it up. Hilarious reading
GTL
Nothofagus gunnii
Nothofagus gunnii
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed 10 Aug, 2016 1:12 am
Region: Australia

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby Nuts » Wed 26 Oct, 2016 7:18 pm

Ah, a troll this way cometh :idea:
坚果
User avatar
Nuts
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 7469
Joined: Sat 05 Apr, 2008 12:22 pm
Region: Tasmania

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby GTL » Thu 27 Oct, 2016 8:34 am

So I'm a troll because I find this thread amusing Paul :roll:
GTL
Nothofagus gunnii
Nothofagus gunnii
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed 10 Aug, 2016 1:12 am
Region: Australia

Re: Pricing the Planet, for love or money?

Postby Nuts » Thu 27 Oct, 2016 3:35 pm

No. Coz you've been posting all troll-like comments GTL.
坚果
User avatar
Nuts
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 7469
Joined: Sat 05 Apr, 2008 12:22 pm
Region: Tasmania

Next

Return to Between Bushwalks

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests