Last week the EPA announced a proposal to tighten permitting fees for the largest greenhouse gas emitters. Smaller industries that emit less than 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year will not have to meet the EPA’s self-described “undue burden” of stiffer regulatory compliance. Yet stiff regulation for some and not for all actually prevents cooperation from occurring. If we’re going to regulate greenhouse gas emissions it should be done across the board. Singling out just the largest emitters while allowing smaller industries to continue emitting green house gasses doesn’t seem like the “common sense” approach stated by Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Lisa Jackson.
Selecting one powerful group does nothing to move cooperation forward, it is simply a divide and conquer tactic that only leads to retaliation in the form of aggressive lobbying and an exhibition of political might. Is this common sense? Is it more important to cling to convenience and comfort, to make it easier for smaller businesses to accumulate capital regardless of the environmental cost of doing business?
Money is a deciding factor for capitalism to survive. Our survival as a species is contingent on the environment. Competition may be the life blood of our capitalist system but it is cooperation that will support our evolution.
Lisa Goddard
