In simple terms in a economic system we put a value on the environment that is as good as gold. Gold only has value because we say it has value, its the same with the environment.<quoted text>What types of changes? I am very interested in hearing what you have to say.
If you made it extremely profitable for clean energy solutions and extremely expensive for non clean solutions then the problem of clean air and clean water fixes itself.
All you do is create a whole new economy, just like the tech boom if you like where large monopolies like oil & mining companies don't drive policies with government. Yes its a paradigm shift in thinking but its no different than the industrial revolutions man has gone through before. From the stone axe to the steam engine and the Nuclear age.
But this has to be world wide and in the meantime developing countries like China and India will kick and scream saying its unfair on them. Even tho China is making huge advances in this area as it is. But it will never be a point where its fair on everyone, so countries that don't comply in making clean products then they get hit with a import duty. So a factory in China making $2 dish washing detergent becomes $4 after import duty applies for non clean manufacturing methods which brings it on par with a locally made detergent using clean methods. That is a simple example of what is a very complicated problem. But if you don't break it down to those simple solutions it never gets solved. Globalisation was sold on its many benefits but the main ones involved lifting countries out of poverty that would never be able to compete previously. Whether its a coffee grower in Sth America or a garment factory in Bangladesh. These places now have infrastructure to get products to our door unlike never before.
But by doing that, we got rid of decades of advances in Labor conditions and environmental practices. So how moral was it, compared to creating proper solutions to deliver the same outcomes.