Tag: environmental policy

Posted on

What Al Gore doesn’t understand about climate change

Al Gore’s contribution to the global climate change debate is not in question and he has, along with the IPCC, been awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his work in raising awareness. If you haven’t seen his film “An inconvenient truth” then do get hold of the DVD – it may just be the most interesting PowerPoint presentation you will ever see! However, does he really understand the nature of the debate? The article below suggests that he has not yet taken account of the most fundamental trade-off in dealing with climate change – the trade-off between our own quality of life and that of our descendants in the future.

Save the earth in six hard questions MSN Slate (22/10/07)

Questions

1. Explain what is mean by a trade-off “between the quality of our own lives and the quality of our descendants’ [lives]”.
2. What is meant by the term ‘risk-averse’ and how is this relevant in the climate change debate?
3. Consider the questions raised by the article. Discuss how relevant the conclusion reached is in the light of these questions.
Posted on

Cement – the solid polluter

Cement may be quietly emerging as one of the biggest obstacles to lowering carbon emissions to reduce the extent of global warming. The cement industry rarely features in media analysis of the ‘worst polluters’, but in fact the industry is responsible, because of the high energy requirements of manufacture, for more than 5% of carbon dioxide emissions. A building boom globally has fuelled demand for the material. Concrete is the second most used product on the planet, after water, so what can be done to reduce the impact of the industry on the environment?

The unheralded polluter: cement industry comes clean on its impact Guardian (12/10/07)

Questions

1. With reference to the article, identify the main external costs resulting from the production of cement.
2. Discuss the view expressed by Dimitri Paplexopoulos, managing director of Titan Cement that “.. [c]ement is needed to satisfy basic human needs, and there is no obvious substitute, so there is a trade-off between development and sustainability“.
3. Discuss policies that governments could adopt to try to move the market for cement towards a more socially optimal level of production.
Posted on

Cycling – good for you and good for the economy

A report from Cycling England has suggested that a £70m investment in cycling each year could save the government £520m per year. The savings result from the positive benefits of increased cycling – lower carbon dioxide emissions and lower NHS costs as we become healthier. But, do the numbers add up?

Investment in cycling could save £520m, government told Guardian (17/9/07)

Questions

1. Define the terms (i) external benefits (ii) external costs and (iii) marginal social benefit.
2. Identify three external benefits that result from increased cycling.
3. Using diagrams as appropriate, show how the market equilibrium and the socially optimum level of cycling will differ.
4. Discuss policies that the government could adopt to move the market closer to the social optimum.
Posted on

Green policies and government – still on amber?

The widening of the M6 will cost £3bn or £1000 an inch. What does this fact tell us about the government’s green priorities? Are we really leading the world on climate change as the government likes to claim? In the article below Ashley Seager (Economics Correspondent for the Guardian) looks at these issues and argues that we may be the poor man of Europe when it comes to ‘green’ policies.

Green means slow to this government Guardian (6/8/07)

Questions

1. Explain what Ashley Seager means by the sentence “What the government has also not done is send out new “price signals”, as economists call them” (paragraph 7).
2. Explain what is meant by a feed-in tariff (FIT). Why does Ashley Seager argue that this is a vital policy tool in the fight against climate change?
3. Discuss two policies that the government could adopt to help raise the proportion of renewable energy generated in the UK.
Posted on

Will the global rush to bio-fuel cause poverty?

In its first report on the impact of bio-fuels, the United Nations (UN) has warned that such fuels may increase poverty in developing countries and have a wider environmental impact than has in the past been suggested. With oil prices at a record high and with climate change pressures, much of the developed world has adopted targets for bio-fuels, but environmentalists have warned that the rush to grow the raw materials for bio-fuels may be more damaging to the environment than the fossil fuels they will replace.

Global rush to energy crops threatens to bring food shortages and increase poverty, says UN Guardian (9/5/07)
UN warns on impacts of biofuels BBC News Online (9/5/07)
UN raises doubts on biofuels Guardian (9/5/07)


Questions
1. What are the external costs and external benefits resulting from the use of bio-fuels as opposed to fossil fuels?
2. Using diagrams as appropriate, show the impact of increased use of bio-fuels on the social equilibrium in the market for fuel.
3. Assess policies that European governments could put in place to ensure that the move towards increased use of bio-fuels has a positive environmental impact.