Thanks for joining me!
Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton
Why a picture of the rising sea? Or an idyllic but uninsulated building? THE THREAT the incredible power of the tsunamis and the surges – inundation, death and destruction in low-lying areas, even flooding London – yet with a ring-fenced MECHANISM a flow of funds (we started inputting to Earth Policy Institute, UK-Cabinet Office and Stern Review) SUGGESTION: A) Some Central Bank or high-street money for a widespread certain investments such as Thorough Enveloping and Solar-Warmth underfloor Stores. Rapidly up to 1 m homes amd buildings p.a. – including a positive-revenue GreenER-deal Credit Money Creation Charge (CMCC) Proposal with EndofTerm Cancellation making THOROUGH GREEN-ER DEAL AFFORDABLE WITHOUT ANY NEED FOR government funding. No Grant needed. UK-Treasury suggested “Office of Fair Trading” denying it could be a government job to Tell the Bank of England (see contradictory Letter from Treasury to the Bank later Made available by Richard Murphy of TaxResearch.org.uk): [SEE APPENDIX ON E T added at the end..]
SECONDLY B) a parallel Government move – ET PROPOSAL WAS SUGGESTED. Legitimately a slice can be justifiable off the importers and middlemen’s resale (sometimes a 5-times mark-up on what was paid, for example in China) a value to Western-style ‘economies’ that justifies an eco-slice to public purse that’s needed towards”Externalities.” That is, transport congestion, noise and pollution, etc. Such as juggernauts through Villages; such as the need to protect Land from sea rise; or greed of certain types of development. A slice that could be halved and returned to eco-needs in each of the trading countries. Helping to mitigate “False Value” a term used by Andrew Wales, author of Big Business, Big Responsibility when one considers job losses from the offshoring, increased transport, resulting noise, pollution, possible future resource shortages, overpopulation of areas, loss of indigenous habitats, loss of forests, loss of variety, etc. Global issues highlighted by STEERglobal Group as long ago as 2006. In 2020s, this slice could be part of adjusting VAT down, and bringing ET alongside it, if grown back to a total of 20% = 10+5+5. THAT ring-fenced could be for the very big projects such as barrages that even UK-London would struggle to fund, including FRESHWATER BAY FOR BENGAL BAY, HELPING THE MOUTHS OF THE GANGES AND BRAMAPUTRA – BEYOND THE RESOURCES OF ANY NATION. And a mechanism to fund PROTECTIVE BARRAGE FOR THE MOUTH OF THE MEDITERANEAN – THAT WOULD STRETCH THE BUDGET OF THE EU without a mechanism, a Structural Adjustment. WE THEN COMMITTED further THOUGHT OVER MONEY:
REDUCE MONEY – REDUCE CONSUMPTION, simply because £1.00 THROUGH THE CASH TILL OR PAYPACKET = 1LB (0.45KG) APPROX CO2 INTO ATMOSPHERE! So a typical “earner” is putting 15 tonnes up – ouch! [said Greenpeace lady]. How to fix: the post-Covid op.? Get to 20+20+20 = 60% of current economies globally after the initial learning-curve “bounce-back.” 20% minimal consumption (industry and agriculture and shrink the rest. 20% initial increase in entertainment, hospitality; 20% overshoot might be examples. With a bounce of the Western ‘Economies’ into Real Work. It’s everyone’s job, to get down to 60% of what they used in the “developed” (some would say Over-developed) nations. In a sedentary (sitting, coccooned in cars and houses – sense: underskilled, the amorphous clone-town) “economies.” Since the 1970s and before that, post-war austerity. After that not really economical. So feel free to phone for ideas on what ‘dig for Britain’ could really mean for you on your own home [how to get economy of energy]. What some of the 40% saved could do (if one has a job) and how to get better eco-returns from savings on buildings, lighter-stronger-warmer foundations; for more detail on the practicalities of the ET slice from trade in imports and how CMCC from money-creation could work – Greenwood Structures +44(0)7702 569 077 – see also “Eco-Fit dream home design” GreenRWorks.
From 2017 onwards we’ve been promoting the idea that a GreenER Deal COULD SAVE MASSES of Gas and Oil in US-UK-EU via Eco-Fit THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE GRANT MONEY. Saving on use of OIL in burners in country areas, saving water (by prewarming the ‘dead leg.’ Thus also saving gas and electricity in boilers in cities. Which could then be on standby if Natural Airconditioning became an Enlightened move. Less cost equals less meed for money, more chance to do things like look after the horses. And giving them something useful to do, like drag the carts arond the farm saving on fossil fuel! [As David Attenborough has said “otherwise, what are all these people (addicted to AI AND/or screens) going to usefully DO?] Using animals, helping children discover a wholesome purpose, discipline etc (half their free time) looking after animals and plants. Growing things. Adults too. With ECO-FIT – boilers would be for bathwater or standby for very cold weather, with just central underfloor warming (also pre-warming water, saves water) – not even needing full ground floor replacement. If the Central Bank or Commercially-created money (made non-repayable money – for such special climate-emergency purposes). Regulated in such a way. Still profitable for banks at 1% return on 20-year contracts, just sending out the statements. That would improve on the old Green Deal and make the Savings on a typical energy bill – being at least £600.00 – more than equal to the Eco-Fit interest (for example on the whole cost of a THOROUGH ENVELOPE about £40k of thorough investment at 1.5%). That is £600 p. a. [Fixed-rate, and £200 p.a. of it returned to green and public purposes minus £20.00 p.a. admin charge for Central Bank. WHICH COUNTRY IS GOING TO BE FIRST TO DO IT? – see below]. So with No repayment beyond flat fixed-interest necessary it’s easy to calculate, affordable and no grant needed for a comprehensive investment AND no duplication of scaffolding. Mervyn King when Governor of Bank of England referred to “cancellation” of the commercially-created money. So it would not be a step too far. NOT require years of implementation, just a forward guidance exchange of letters with UK- Chancellor. Although this [Lord King’s comment] is not strictly true for mortgage money normally. Freshly-created “by normal means” is the Nuance. “Normally” such new money is “repayable” to banks as the interest on principal sums issued declines. NEW MONEY ARISING EVERY TIME. “LOANS” ISSUED AT A HIGHER PROPERTY PRICE than when sold before – SO EASY TO IDENTIFY from Land Registry figures at RE-SELLING OF EXISTING PROPERTY. This could be treated as new real money, as once it enters the system just joins a flow. As if they were savings of depositors [in people’s understanding, yet actually created money] repayable, so replacing the flow as interest declines – YET IT’S NEW “CREDIT” MONEY. So normally mortgage-takers are making payments approx the same over a typical 20-year contract. Because the new greenER funds would be only for the special eco-fit anti-climate-change purposes, it could be perfectly possible with a regulatory rule change to quickly implement fixed-rate funds and be an “irredeemable” as Martin Wolf Financial Times confirms. Proposal: a mechanism avoiding a need for repayment for such special purposes (& avoiding any fears of runaway inflation or further lowering of bond returns). Stimulating rapid success even at £40 bn per year straight into the works from the banks using a high-street local approval scheme, but taking, UK-wide 40 years, help averting the ACTUAL climate emergency. Possibly starting in UK’s Midlands. [Meanwhile in Covid-panic conditions banks could generously waive interest permanently (and leaseholders, lease payments) {regulator scrutiny to ensure fairness – for example if leaseholder has interest payments to make on a particular property} until businesses/householder incomes return to at least 60%.] A recipe for stability in all conditions and with Eco-Fit up to 500,000 jobs. Simple hand-skill jobs in a new industry making External Wall Insulation doubly efficient by eliminating wind suction at roof level, between buildings and at floor levels. How else could Electricity/Gas use be Brought down and government aspirations seriously met?
[During Covid type events, landlords could be required to waive lease payments/rent as both banks and owners too have comparatively low overheads, especially those enjoying full-repairing lease from those renting.] Bank activities are very secure with money-creation in good times. High capital buffers have improved on that. Bank activities need to be closely examined for value-for-money considering they are getting marked-up prices repaid FOR THE LAND AS WELL as the building, paid for over and over again. Hardly “Jusitce as Fairness.” A consumer society of created wanrs gone wrong.. That money-creation – in the £100bn to £200 billions (and beyond) region – is a lot of free money in good years not stated on annual bank reports equating deposits to loans. Devolves to Central Banks regulators (and QE in emergency situations) under Treasury and international guidance, economics, etc. BUT AS YET no Treasury/regulators’ instruction has been made to achieve regulated purpose-driven low-interest and cancellation (incentivising certain cases such as Thorough Enveloping and Solar-Warming Stores, cancellation at end of term) appears forthcoming. Looking ahead – forward guidance should become forward action to get the climate emergency under control [see also ET proposal prepared for Treasury- BofE and Institution of Civil Engineers/NewCivilEngineer as a COMPLEMENTARY SUBJECT – as a possible barrage-funding Eco-Slice providing the money for those BARRAGES AS ENERGY-GENERATING and PUMPED-STORAGE ASSETS, PERHAPS FORMING FRESH-WATER BAYS bilaterally with rich countries such a India-Bangladesh using only some of the income from trade partnerships so much more constructive than World Trade Organisation ‘rules’.]
SUMMARY : Immediate emphasis on 1.5 % “20-year” non-repayable money at fixed rates for ultra-special purposes if a THROUGHLY ECO-FIT result with Solar-Warmth Storage under-floor is achieved and sideways/rear leakages eliminated. PARALLEL STEP – push for Trade-Adjust in time for COP28.
INNOVATIVELY that could release a slice of some of the extra created money to public purse of one-third of the interest (the 0.5% proportion initially limited to that also on mortgage money for first-time buyers). Once a level of retro-fit of a million homes per year at average £40k [if funding stream approved in this fashion] that would be £200 million to the Exchequer, £400m the next year and so on for 20 years [growing to £4bn p.a. then 20 more years at the same level of £4 bn p.a. Similarly £8 billion p.a. to the high-st banks as it grows to 20 million homes then staying level from a further 20 years as 20 million more homes and buildings improved. A very big and long job, with a higher return from the £100-200 bn p.a. public-purse growing slice. And the £40 billion only a start to a more BALANCED ECONOMY GLOBALLY (INCLUDING CHINA). UK-Treasury looks to 100,000 jobs from £3 billion [2020 Chancellor’s statement] so lets say 200,000 to 400,000 more-efficient UK jobs from £40 billion investment each year lasting altogether for 40 years, depending on numbers of immigrants, birthrate, etc. Then (later in 2023/4) IT COULD BE EXTENDED TO MORTGAGE MONEY FOR FIRST-TIME BUYERS and a mortgage-money Eco-slice could form a return to local-gov replacing the diminished rate-support grant, certainly IF RING-FENCED, protecting libraries and eco-education.
SEPARATELY – As suggested to Stern’s Review and Treasury Select Committee’s Expert at the time, an adjustment to trade rules could see E T Proposal split in two and half returned on each side of the trade equation for eco-means – establishing funds for bigger projects globally such as sea barriers (for example, extending Swansea Lagoon southerly to link via future-proof caissons with a similar North-Devon lagoon – indeed, could be a shorter one West Somerset to Wales, but as in all decisions best to go for the ideal posiotion and construction relatively free of funding constraints). Such a Barrage would be a first, closely-followed by East of-Thames Barrage (Also < 50 m sea depth) and Freshwater storage lagoons, could be extended with land reclamation to a plan for a Hong-Kong-sized hub and airport (see Sea Level Rise, Retreat, Defend of Attack) and then Simultaneously (with the other half of the first tranche of ET proposal) Bangladesh-India Bengal-Bay Barrage. UK’s are all in comparatively shallow seas and a lot of the dredgings would be used to fill microporous bags as Foundations for SLOW-INCLINE Beaches to minimise any need for rock armour and via beaches increase amenity value (as well as the INUNDATION-PROTECTION VALUE) generating energy for all nearby countries. It is time to think globally, acting locally.
Simple eh? Both of them. See above to be in touch for more and better information, voice clips and maybe join in as group member, promoter and/or consultant, to press government via adequate relationships to regulate and release the high-street money, when fully understood over a few short convesations in order to elucidate and enlighten ourselves and others about long-term & other plans. ian[dot]greenwood[at]phonecoop[dot]coop. – the contact for the diagrams
APPENDIX – input to STERN Review and Treasury Select Committee Globalisation
The need to invest heavily against climate change was accepted at around 1% GDP (Stern Report 2006) but only based on an extra metre of sea level. This paper proposes that a new green tax
is justified, funding – at 2022 prices
- global energy stability by greater subsidy to renewable energy and conservation
- equitable allocation into poorer countries
- organic sea barriers and R&D
A new ‘VAT style’ tax could be placed on sales of imported products, investing in projects mitigating against climate change and adapting to its effects. Uniquely, the proposal is to return an equal share of the funds direct to these projects in the producer nations which would otherwise be unable to afford them. Thus, the tax proposed, the Environmental Tax justified by rich country resale on Imports (ET) could levy in excess of $1000 billion per annum if it were adopted worldwide and be a major stability fund. This could be an opportunity to stabilise oil and gas prices, other resource shortages and to reduce the frequency and cost of disasters.
Shared wealth & knowledge has the potential to develop quality of life in the world. However, the dangers to civilisation of consumerism & climate change, the latter highlighted by disasters in Southern Asia, the
USA and elsewhere are becoming increasingly clear. Apart from the loss of lives, rising sea levels[1] extreme climatic conditions are a threat to sea level or nearsea level regions, many of which provide some of the most fertile and productive agricultural land, and the location for many important business and industrial centres.
The Global Commons Institute and leading experts such as UK’s Chief Scientific Climate Advisers agree that action must be taken fast to counter further climate change. The unwillingness of the US government/others to commit to international treaties and objectives towards more sustainable environmental policy indicates that UK/EU must lead the way in this area. The 2006 Stern Report has proposed 1% global GDP level of investment, but underestimates sea level rise, so this paper suggests a way of increasing funding substantially and fairly.
A mechanism could be developed that would free existing financial resources to fund strategic actions in the area of environmental sustainability. Such an Ecomechanism could use some of the great profits from the more
highly polluting activities. One concept that provides scope to source these funds is the Currency Advantage (or Import Advantage) that wealthy countries automatically have when they spend their valuable currencies in ‘poor’ countries. (A similar ratio has been used in past studies to allow for the reduced comparative cost of living in poorer countries in dollar or sterling terms, that is: the purchasing power of the stronger currencies). The traders who benefit most from the Currency Exchange Rate Advantage are frequently the same ones who cause enormous pollution and resource depletion by transporting goods between poor countries of production and rich countries that provide the market for the goods, for example by air. [Although these activities contribute to economic growth, the current trade system tends to avoid contributing to the cost of pollution caused and little allowance is built in to allow for resource depletion or the research needed to avoid such depletion, develop alternatives or defend against sea level rise. Therefore only wealthy countries can do this research or benefit from clean technology and clean transport etc adding to global tension]. BUT A SIMPLE MECHANISM’s HERE
ICE is important –underestimated sea rise It is a well-known basic scientific fact that floating ice displaces its own mass of water. Therefore floating ice shrinks back into an equal volume of water when it melts. The melting of the Arctic floating ice has in the decades to 2000 reduced its height by about half yet this has added little to sea levels. In the 2 decades since it almost disappeared and therefore will not be there to absorb (as it has done) large amounts of latent heat, a cushioning process that has been shielding the planet from sea level and temperature rises. The experts were proven right Accelerated rise is expected in decades to follow with the full rate of melting of land supported ice discharging into the sea, rivers not emptying will need sea barrier plans.
Using the Advantage as a guide (recognising differing labour rates, costs of living and production), the difference between the cost of comparable goods and the value released when re-sold in the importing country, companies and traders operating in this way would be subject to a levy designed to protect future resources (and to tend to moderate consumption) which might be named the Environmental Tax on Imports (ETI see fig 2 below). The revenues from ETI would be split equally between projects in the country of production and country of product destination.
The body responsible for the collection and use of this levy would then allocate it direct to projects promoting long-term environmental sustainability, such as barrages for renewable energy and sustainable transportation improvements, etc. With the ET in place some of the inherent imbalances between poor and rich countries in terms of investment against natural disasters and in technology could be reduced. By reducing the imbalances using a stable system of allocation in these areas an actual boost in healthy trade and investment should occur therefore increasing advantage to poorer counties and tending to reduce borrowings for essential infrastructure, migration pressures, etc. The funding allocated towards such things as organic sea barriers[2] which might eventually be needed as land ice melts and sea levels rise could be of great interest to governments and to the insurance and re-insurance industries. Figure 1 shows in a simple form the existing situation, Figure 2 the change. The burden would be fair, shared between consumer, retailer and importer.
Existing production and trade would be relatively unaffected, so the proposed solution is an ideal way to ensure that resource users pay a fairer contribution. As an addition to such measures as carbon taxes, ETI
(operating like VAT) could be used to stimulate renewable energy and conservation in both producer and consumer regions of the global economy introducing a more stable funding regime independent of the vagaries of consumer or financial markets. The UK or EU treasuries have the potential to understand how such an adjustment to international trade could return some of traders’ profits in a more managed way and in the process reduce economic shocks, the problems of climate change and unsustainable loss of industry in ‘developed’ regions. ET and our parallel proposal could also reduce dependence on the rather ‘blunt instrument’ of interest rate rises as the main controlling mechanism of monetary policy and reduce otherwise inevitable property price inflation. (Blunt because increasing interest rates supresses healthy business investment).
Conclusion
The proposal outlined in this paper touches briefly on a number of topical and ethical
issues including the subjects of economic and energy rationalisation. It proposes a practical way of implementing what would effectively be a Global ‘Marshal Plan’ (which has been suggested by a German organisation of this name that has received wide support). Yet it is not suggested that the funding should come entirely from the USA (as the original Marshal Plan) but that the idea of using the currency advantage of wealthy countries to support directly the necessary projects needs to be urgently implemented – otherwise resource shortages will be very fast upon us.
Below is a quote from the Earth Policy Institute which is encouraging. It will be necessary for people to do their bit to get behind ETI as a practical proposal by lobbying their MPs and other action in co-operation with those in positions of influence. It is suggested that: “All of the world would get all of the benefit from all of the ETI” via economic and energy supply stability. A Credit Money Banking Adjustment (CMBA) (credit creation charge) has been proposed to facilitate finance flows more easily (described separately, see 2022’s input to UK-Gov’s Request for Eco-Feedback June 2022).
STEERglobal
Existing Pie Chart for exports from ‘poorer’ nations imported into ‘richer’ nations
(If the value chain is simplified into 4 sectors 25% each)
[poverty defined in technological and currency terms]
| Costs of the import process Legitimate’ profit – charts yet to be added | |
Payment to producing nation
Export/Import differential (Currency advantage)
Proposed levy as part of profit derived from Import/Export Differential
(If the Value Chain is simplified into 4 sectors 25% each)
Existing payment to producing nation
| Costs of the import process to importing nation “Legitimate” profit to importing nation Profit to importing nation derived from Import/Export Differential Levy to sustainability projects – importing nation [= 0.5(Environmental Tax on Imports)] |
AND HOW COULD BRITAN AND EUROPE PROTECT ITSELF?
Levy to sustainability projects – producing nation [= 0.5(ETI)]
“STEER sounds like a sensible policy option for helping to make the market tell the ecological & social truth and thus move toward a more environmentally sustainable economy” Earth Policy Institute 2004
Ian Greenwood is a structural engineer without a vested interest in stimulating the market for major projects and has been saving energy for 30 years at a practical level. Adding to his broad career, areas of investment and overland travels, he researched the STEER idea for sustainability in trade and resources and founded STEERglobal.org Support is being gathered from government, other organisations and the public.
A similar paper has been proposed for publication in
Engineering Sustainability (Proceedings, Institution of Civil Engineers). See also Money as Debt video.
The June 2022 emphasis is on the global financial system and London-UK’s role. The
suggestion we made was that a new
Stimulation or BOOST contrary to the socalled Zero-Sum activities of speculators could be achievable by some very simple rules of adjustment of credit money flows.
All the regulators are in place, but are there sufficient experts with the hands-on skills to see the real value changing hands at inflated prices and UK’s high dependency on these “vagary” flows and economic cycles the big players make fortunes from?
Economists for example write, quite often that too much saving is harmful, ignoring the social benefits should disaster befall an individual or family. 2022 has seen the reticence left from the last financial crash and now substantial price rises.
It is important to have a solid base of property owners and solid families and fewer tending to live “hand-to-mouth” or with underemployment difficulties, etc. less need fotr benefits or social credit
Hence the idea of ’20-year Money’ at 1.5% enabling typical £40k “Enveloping” investment enabling not only natural overnight cooling but shielding from the harshest of the sun, collecting the warmth for storage deep under buildings, with a trickle through the warmer floors easily dealt with by admitting cool air on summer nights.
As Carbon Trust advocated “Warmth where needed most at no Extraction Cost.” Much less electricity and gas (or oil, coal, burnt timber).
IN THE CHARTS ABOVE THE PINK segment
would be divided to allow at least 5 % or 6% return to the poorer countries’ projects.
For example, a focus on the Barrage needed to prevent Bangladesh’s lowlands from being lost.
Other áreas could harvest renewables too at the same time as protecting against inundation.
Bristol Channel Barrage would be useful to save Gloucestershire and Somerset.
A near-miss occured there a few years ago.
East-of Thames is a much longer/bigger Project for an organic barrier and barrage, from North Downs Kent to North of Felixstowe Port (the port only has surge protection of 6 metres).
And it might include a Hong-Kong-size island with Transit Airport, relieving some of Heathrow.
Ian.Greenwood@phonecoop.coop
STEER Group +44 (0)7702 569 077
[1] Greenland is possibly committed to melting adding 7 metres alone to levels (see box or ub06 reference available on http://www.STEERglobal.org)
[2] $107 billion spent in New Orleans one year on. What effect would such a disaster have on a smaller country with a long, low coastline?
STEER global for balanced trade, better interest on money "tweak" and economical economics 