Re: [OPE] Questioning the Earth's Value Version 2.0

From: Michael Eldred (
Date: Tue May 20 2008 - 17:19:01 EDT

Cologne 20-May-2008

Paul Cockshott schrieb  Tue, 20 May 2008 15:01:40 +0100:

> I dont see that what you are proposing Michael is any different from the existing carbon trading scheme, which allows for carbon sinks to be traded against emissions.
> Your proposal has the problem that it will not for a long time be possible to exactly balance emissions against sinks
> so some sort of quantitative total cap on emissions is needed as per Kyoto.
> My reading of Neurath a week or two ago prompted me to a rather different solution contained in the attachment.
> Paul Cockshott
> Dept of Computing Science
> University of Glasgow
> +44 141 330 1629
> -----Original Message-----
> From: on behalf of Michael Eldred
> Sent: Tue 5/20/2008 11:25 AM
> To: Heidegger, An-archos; artefact philosophy; OPE, List
> Subject: [OPE] Questioning the Earth's Value Version 2.0
> Cologne 20-May-2008
> Version 2.0 of my
> Questioning the Earth's Value -
> A ground-rent approach proposing a carbon sink industry
> with a new PowerPoint presentation is now available at
> In the context of a global carbon absorption 'industry' aligning
> economic self-interest with a universal interest in environmental
> protection, industriousness means also letting the Earth, in its virgin
> state, simply be itself. Such industriousness through letting-be is a
> step on the way to humankind practising custodianship of the Earth.
> "Now, that's a topical piece!"
> "Why didn't I think of that?"
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-  artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art  _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
>                   Name: winmail.dat
>    winmail.dat    Type: application/ms-tnef
>               Encoding: base64

Thanks for your response, Paul. Unfortunately, I was not able to salvage any readable attachment from your e-mail.

First of all, I don't think anyone at all has yet seen the connection between value, power and esteem.

Second, the existing system of carbon trading scheme has artificial prices for carbon emissions insofar as they are first set by political horse-trading.

Third, there is provision for carbon offsets, but these are not conceived through a link to absolute and differential rent for the Earth's carbon absorption, but
piecemeal as the carbon offset 'produced' by specific projects such as reafforestation or using pig manure to fire a  power plant. This piecemeal approach means that,
just as with the artificial nature of the carbon emission prices, the scheme is open to abuse because a carbon offset is given a price in relation to some sort of
arbitrarily (politically) determined, notional status quo.

There is no genuine, well-thought-out link between carbon absorption and ground-rent in the current carbon trading system. Such muddledheadedness  inevitably leads to the
absurd perversions with which politics is replete.

The mere fact that carbon emissions currently exceed carbon absorption is no argument at all against first of all clearly conceiving the link through the concept of
ground-rent. The problem is the utter contempt for 'mere', 'idealist' concepts which here has very noticeable consequences.

_-_-_-_-_-_-_-  artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art  _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_- _-_
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred (c)_-_-

ope mailing list

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 31 2008 - 00:00:04 EDT