Definitions

When you pay at the gas pump or pay your energy bill, what are you NOT paying for?
Negative Externality: an effect or consequence not reflected in analysis or price. The cost is imposed on others. The economic, environmental, health and security costs are paid for by society at large, which is not reflected in market price.
Air pollution from power plants alone costs $160 billion a year in medical expenses. The World Health Organization estimates that climate change is already responsible for 150,000 deaths annually. Then there’s mountain top removal, mining injury and fatalities, war and other political problems…

Now I know what you’re thinking- I already pay too much for energy. Are you telling me I need to pay even more? I just want you to understand that the true costs are much greater than you may realize. And you are paying them, whether at the gas pump, in the rising cost of healthcare and insurance or through the taxes that come out of your paycheck.


Informed consent: we are not making truly informed decisions when we purchase things because the labels don’t tell us the impact that the products have on the environment. You energy bill does not mention pollution or global warming.

In some areas of daily life, we are now allowed to make good choices. At the doctor’s office in the past few years, you’ve probably noticed a new movement to protect your rights. One of these legally-recognized rights is informed consent. This is the idea that a person has the right to truly understand the consequences of what would happen to their body through some intervention. All positive and negative effects must be explained, or the person cannot make a free, informed choice about whether they will agree to the intervention. This right is protected by law and held up in the courts.

Why should the products and energy we use be any different? The true impact of what we use should be explained to us fully, without having to do a lot of digging and research. Your doctor doesn’t tell you to go home and Google the heart surgery he’s advising. He’s obligated to explain it to you fully.

The producers of goods and energy should be held to the same standards. California has enacted some labeling laws. So if you happen to pick up a bottle of a cleaning product that’s also sold in California, it may say “Warning, this substance is known to cause cancer in the state of California.” And I know what you’re thinking- thank goodness I don’t live in California!
Seriously, people are busy. They go to work, make dinner, put the kids to bed and try to relax for a few minutes. It should be general, common knowledge that the phosphorous in their dishwasher detergent is killing the oceans. That by burning coal for energy, mercury, arsenic, lead, sulfur, nitrogen oxides and other smog-forming compounds are released causing brain, lung and heart disease and death.

Companies don’t want labeling laws enacted because their sales would drop. If they were looking out for our best interests, they would be making the least harmful product already, and would be proud to label it as such. We have to start holding them accountable.


Quality: I’ve heard it said again and again when I ask mechanics and repairmen why something can’t be built differently in the first place. Because if the company has to pay $1.00 more per unit and they sell a million units, that’s a million dollars they’re losing. Why not pass on that cost? Consumers will not tolerate higher cost. We have an expectation that we can get things at artificially low prices because of manufacturing in countries where labor is cheap. So rather than make all cars conform to California emissions standards, auto makers sell 2 different emissions systems based on where the vehicle is sold. Air pollution standards are stricter in the summer so the power plant decreases pollution output just for the summer. Almost all recently built home central air conditioning units have to be retrofitted with a “hard start kit” which stores energy and gives an extra boost for starting up, but the company will not install them initially despite recommendations from repairmen and obvious benefits to the electricity grid.

Yes, it’s just too costly or impossible to change over an entire utility system. People will not pay a higher price for a utility service. Oh really? An entire utility infrastructure has been replaced by no fewer than 10 different companies- the cellular network. The amount of money people of all income levels throw at cell phones constantly amazes me. I think the newest models are over $1000. Yes it’s a little more convenient than waiting at home for a phone call but this is not how cell phones are used the majority of the time. People are disengaged from their surroundings, and they are too busy telling someone on the phone that they’re at the checkout line at the supermarket to say hi to the clerk. All plans cost upward of $50 a month, and the service is terribly unreliable compared to land lines- static, dropped calls, service blackout areas, whatever. Can you imagine telling someone, you’re now going to pay 3 times more for a service you already have and the quality is going to be much worse? There would be rioting in the streets. We would hear endlessly about how unfair this is to lower income people. The key is to convince someone it’s what they want, then money or poorer quality service are no problems.