Climate change is an acute environmental challenge and while achieving net zero may be possible in a few decades, reducing atmospheric carbon yet further remains a long term goal. There are other chronic issues, pollution, depletion of resources and loss of agricultural productivity

Pollution can be seen as a burden on the environment causing degradation. With mineral resources. generally the high quality ores get extracted first leaving ever lower quality ores. This means larger mines, more energy consumption and more pollution. Adding up to a greater burden. This burden can only increase for the foreseeable future, net zero is not the end of the story.

Note that we will never run out of any particular chemical element entirely, volcanic activity will continue to deliver huge amounts of the lowest quality ore in the form of basalt. Some of the more soluble elements, notable lithium, end up in the sea. This would require a holistic approach to mineral extraction. (I might write a page expanding on this)

A few years ago a group of eminent economists proposed the idea of the Carbon Fee and Dividend where a fee would be charged on all carbon emissions and distributed uniformly to everybody.

Also I came across the idea of using the word “Compensation” instead of “Dividend”. It carries the message that charging any sort of environmental burden fee is going increase the cost of living for everybody, so everybody is entitled to compensation rather than a benefit.

So maybe economists should be thinking in terms of Environmental Burden Fee and Compensation!