Follow

@Azure Unless offset by some other price-increasing mechanism (taxes, accounting rules, depletion), that's simply not the case.

The problem in natural resources, or sinks, overlaps strongly with the utter failure of economics in concerns with having a proper and rational theory of natural resource cost acounting.

The existing theory simply doesn't match established behaviour or geological realities. It's based on Howard Hotelling, L.C. Grey, and David Ricardo's work.

Hotelling's paper itself is somewhat staggering in its failure to account for geological facts. It does draw heavily on cost accounting, see Alexander Hamilton Church (and yes, related to that A.H.).

Contrast the fact that humans consume petroleum at 5 million times its rate of formation ("Burning Buried Sunshine", Jeffrey S. Dukes, 2003: www-legacy.dge.carnegiescience). If formation time were a cost input, the price of petroleum would likely rise somewhat.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Toot.Cat

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!