Re: Nuclear Power

On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 02:47:09 GMT, William Morse
<wdmorse@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

bwardREMOVE@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Ward) wrote in news:44b48d2d.30821771
@localhost:

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 03:37:46 GMT, William Morse
<wdmorse@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

bwardREMOVE@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Ward) wrote in
44b34119.38575440@localhost:">news:44b34119.38575440@localhost:


The public is clearly subsidizing the oil and gas producers. They
don't "own" the oil and gas - that is a public good. They didn't
make
it, they only exploit it and profit from it. We choose to assign
ownership to them for economic reasons, but let us be very clear on
this point - they do not "own" in any real sense the fossil fuels.
Since the fossil fuels are a public good, if we were trying to be
completely fair we would require the extraction industries to repay
the value of the oil extracted.

Without the "extraction industries", what is the value of
the unfound, unpumped oil? How is it determined?

By the replacement cost.

How do you know how much there is, or where it is?
Remember, it hasn't ben found, because there are no
"extraction industries".

The replacement cost is the cost to produce the equivalent energy from
renewable resources. You only need to know it when the oil is extracted
- we are talking a per unit cost, not a total cost.

And who sets that renewable energy price? A free market?

You also need to explain how you can extract oil when you
don't know where it is.


Who
_does_ own the oil the extraction industries find, in your
paradigm?

God. If you are an agnostic, as I am, you might want to instead say We
the People as a substitute,

In your view, then, oil is a sort of "common good", like
property under communism. Where has that ever worked?

Perhaps you should try reading what I wrote : "We choose to assign
ownership to them for economic reasons."

I did, and wondered if you have a mouse in your pocket. Who
is "we"? Surely not the "We the People" in the Preamble to
the Constitution.

This is precisely to avoid the
tragedy of the commons. But the fact that we choose to assign ownership
does not make it any kind of moral right.

This country (USA) doesn't work on "moral rights". We have
a Constitution, which defines our representative government.
We are a country of laws. See the Taliban if you want to
live under someone's idea of moral rights.

The distinction might be best
understood in reference to your house on your land. The house is yours,
the land is God's. You can do what you like with your house, but you owe
a duty to God (or in my interpretation to future generations) to properly
steward the land.

Again, who decides what "proper stewardship" is? Any group
who claims to be "stakeholders", or the landowner?

You may be more left than you think.

Regards,

Bill Ward

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nuclear Power
    ... don't "own" the oil and gas - that is a public good. ... to be completely fair we would require the extraction industries ... By the replacement cost. ... The experiment of a government setting ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: The Coming Greater Depression
    ... It's the *relative* cost of farming the land. ... not as long as the price of oil keeps going up (see Peak ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: Nuclear Power
    ... don't "own" the oil and gas - that is a public good. ... ownership to them for economic reasons, but let us be very clear on ... completely fair we would require the extraction industries to repay ... The replacement cost is the cost to produce the equivalent energy from ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Nuclear Power
    ... don't "own" the oil and gas - that is a public good. ... completely fair we would require the extraction industries to repay ... So we are subsidizing the oil and gas producers. ... which us true conservatives ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: Nuclear Power
    ... don't "own" the oil and gas - that is a public good. ... completely fair we would require the extraction industries to repay ... So we are subsidizing the oil and gas producers. ... which us true conservatives ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)