False economics
August 27th 2011 06:46
False Economics
Coal Seam gas mining is as false as it can be when it says the miners will care for the environment and the agricultural land in which they are drilling holes. They, the miners, will NOT be able to compensate the country for any loss of agricultural land due to their accidental pollution of either or both the land itself, or the underground water supplies.
Miners think of compensation in terms of the purchase price of the land, but that is not the most worrying problem. It’s the productivity of the land over many years which is the greatest problem. Supposing a 1000 acre farm has an income of $100 thousand a year and that land is polluted for 100 years by the poisons used by the mining company in its operations. What is the real value of compensation which should be paid? A million or so for the current land value as estimated by friends of the mining company, or the loss of productivity for 100 years? I would go for the latter option and I would add to that, all the other income generated by the produce from that farm, Transport, processing, manufacturing, retail sales, and so on. A very difficult task for some number cruncher to work out, but probably in excess of about five times what the farmer’s income would be
[ Click here to read more ]
Coal Seam gas mining is as false as it can be when it says the miners will care for the environment and the agricultural land in which they are drilling holes. They, the miners, will NOT be able to compensate the country for any loss of agricultural land due to their accidental pollution of either or both the land itself, or the underground water supplies.
Miners think of compensation in terms of the purchase price of the land, but that is not the most worrying problem. It’s the productivity of the land over many years which is the greatest problem. Supposing a 1000 acre farm has an income of $100 thousand a year and that land is polluted for 100 years by the poisons used by the mining company in its operations. What is the real value of compensation which should be paid? A million or so for the current land value as estimated by friends of the mining company, or the loss of productivity for 100 years? I would go for the latter option and I would add to that, all the other income generated by the produce from that farm, Transport, processing, manufacturing, retail sales, and so on. A very difficult task for some number cruncher to work out, but probably in excess of about five times what the farmer’s income would be
| 9 |
| Vote |
Read More
Add Comments
