Governments, yes. Corporations, no. Business exists to make a profit and to increase that profit year after year. That will have to change. Corporations must aim to be neutral in terms of resource usage - whatever resources they use must either be renewable (at least at the rate they are being used) or be returned to the environment in some way (i.e. no net usage of non-renewables). I don't think any business in the world would do that and it means a completely different society, in my view. When societies near the end of (or a markedly reduced capacity to extract) resources, then that society has to change to a new way of working. If that doesn't happen, then I see collapse as inevitable.Cabrone wrote:He has a good point that the government and corporations can make a huge difference to reduce our energy intensive lifestyles.
That would be seen as unfair by many who can't afford to just ditch their cars. I think that kind of scheme would have to be preceeded by a government (i.e. a tax-payer) handout to get all cars fully serviced and, as far as possible, tuned to minimise emissions and maximise fuel efficiency, before starting to tax, perhaps based on the car getting no worse (on both those factors) year on year (or more frequently). Cutting speed limits and enforcing them (coupled with a large effort to inform people of the reasons) would be an additional benefit. There could also be incentives to move to more efficient vehicles but unless people see it as fair on the vast majority, it wouldn't get suppport. However, this kind of thing is just a delaying tactic, more radical change is needed in the long run, though energy saved must be ploughed into restructuring society to a sustainable position.Cabrone wrote:apply taxes to motorists based on carbon output
Population increases also need to be halted.
I don't expect any of this to happen.
Tony