19 March 2010

Speed blogging

  • A poll of 600 CA voters [pdf] finds that 55% oppose the $11 billion bond and 34% favor. I know that there will be a big campaign and lots of scare tactics, but $11 billion for no certain gain is much scarier. I am opposed.

  • Norway's sovereign wealth fund ($350 billion) is investing in sustainable water businesses [pdf].

  • In places without water markets, people want to know what water is worth, like this guy in Texas who put his water shares on eBay.

  • Another pricing failure in Marin, where customers are upset that their bills are going up after they used less water. That's NOT how to do it (this is).

  • My friend and lawyer* Darren Azman (a law student graduating in May) has a paper on taxes and shaming that is accepted for publication but not finalized. Tell him what you think about "The Efficacy of State Shaming Campaigns on Taxpayer Compliance..." (I worry about presumed guilt.)

  • The high costs of animal manure on the environment are not being paid by consumers or companies.

  • Water agencies subsidized the production of "Water Supply Reliability Through Innovation." Too bad they are unwilling to increase reliability with higher prices :(
Hattips to MJ, DW and JWT

* See, I do like some lawyers!

3 comments:

thomasthethinkengine said...

Higher prices from the outset is not the solution. This is how to sort out urban water utility revenue:
http://thomasthethinkengine.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/silly-water-utility-fails-to-implement-tttes-urban-water-pricing-model/

David Zetland said...

@TTE -- I will blog on your idea (a good one!) soon.

thomasthethinkengine said...

Hi David, I have another post cooking about water trade on the Murray, for next week.