Nov192009
Conserving resources means conserving money
Filed under Environment by david brooks at 9:14 am
I’ve always been puzzled why fans of conservation (of energy, water, natural resources, etc.) don’t emphasize money saving more. It’s probably because conservation often requires an initial monetary outlay, and we humans don’t do well calculating long-term savings vs. short-term expense.
But here’s a great example, from this story in the Burlington Free-Press: IBM’s semiconductor plant near Burlington, Vt., has single-handedly caused water used in the regional water district to fall 20 percent in a decade. It didn’t do it to be “green” but to save $3 million a year in the cost of pumping and disposing of that water. Even for a big company and big factory, that’s real money.
Speaking of conservation and money, however, the federal fumbling over a national cap-and-trade carbon emissions bill, plus the nation’s lowered energy needs in the recession, are driving the futures price for RGGI allotments down and down. From CarbonPositive.net: “The benchmark December futures RGGI contract closed at $2.21 on Thursday on the Chicago Climate Futures Exchange after eight days of falls. There may now be little to stop prices falling to a minimum level set by regulators of $1.86, one market analyst said.”
Add New Comment
Viewing 2 Comments
Thanks. Your comment is awaiting approval by a moderator.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Add New Comment
Trackbacks