subject
Business, 10.12.2019 00:31 jayy2x41

Two plants are emitting a uniformly mixed pollutant called gunk into the beautiful sky over tourist town. the city government decides it can tolerate total emissions of no more than 100 kg of gunk per day. plant g has marginal reduction costs of 100 - 4x and is currently polluting at a level of 25, while plant k has marginal reduction costs of 150 - y and currently pollutes at a level of 150 (x and y are the level of emissions at each plant).1. what is the cost-effective pollution level for each plant if total pollution must equal 100? suppose the city government knows marginal reduction costs at the two plants. in this case, could the city obtain cost-effective pollution reduction using a cac approach? if so, how? 2. in reality, why might the city have a hard time getting this information? what are the two "incentive-based" policies that could be used to get a cost effective reduction of pollution to 100 units, without knowing the mc of the two firms? be specific. discuss two advantages each method has over the other.3. suppose the authorities are considering either a tradeable emission permit system, in which they give half the permits to each firm, or a tax system. if both systems work perfectly, how much will the firms have to pay, in total, for pollution reduction under the two schemes? (assume permits are bought and sold by firms at a price equal to the tax.) could this explain why tourist town would be more likely to adopt a permit giveaway system? 4. several theoretical studies have shown that incentive-based policies might generate huge cost savings, and the ib approach could be as much as 22 times cheaper than the cac approach. discuss at least three reasons why tourist town might not get such substantial savings in moving from cac regulation to a marketable permit system.5. suppose the marginal benefits of pollution reduction in tourist town are constant and equal to $64. (each unit of pollution reduction brings in one more tourist, who spends $64.) is 100 units of pollution obtained cost-effectively, an efficient level? if not, will efficiency be achieved through more or less pollution? why?

ansver
Answers: 3

Another question on Business

question
Business, 21.06.2019 19:40
Bear, inc. estimates its sales at 200,000 units in the first quarter and that sales will increase by 20,000 units each quarter over the year. they have, and desire, a 25% ending inventory of finished goods. each unit sells for $35. 40% of the sales are for cash. 70% of the credit customers pay within the quarter. the remainder is received in the quarter following sale. cash collections for the third quarter are budgeted at
Answers: 3
question
Business, 22.06.2019 19:20
This problem has been solved! see the answerwhich of the following statements is correct? the consumer price index is a measure of the overall level of prices, whereas the gdp deflator is not a measure of the overall level of prices. if, in the year 2011, the consumer price index has a value of 123.50, then the inflation rate for 2011 must be 23.50 percent. compared to the gdp deflator, the consumer price index is the more common gauge of inflation. the consumer price index and the gdp deflator reflect the goods and services bought by consumers equally well.
Answers: 2
question
Business, 22.06.2019 20:20
Tl & co. is following a related-linked diversification strategy, and soar inc. is following a related-constrained diversification strategy. how do the two firms differ from each other? a. soar inc. generates 70 percent of its revenues from its primary business, while tl & co. generates only 10 percent of its revenues from its primary business. b. soar inc. pursues a backward diversification strategy, while tl & co. pursues a forward diversification strategy. c. tl & co. will share fewer common competencies and resources between its various businesses when compared to soar inc. d. tl & co. pursues a differentiation strategy, and soar inc. pursues a cost-leadership strategy, to gain a competitive advantage.
Answers: 3
question
Business, 23.06.2019 03:00
On december 31, 2016, the decarreau, andrew, and bui partnership had the following fiscal year-end balance sheet: cash $10,000accounts receivable $20,000inventory $25,000plant assets - net $30,000loan to decarreau $18,000total assets $103,000accounts payable $14,000loan from bui $15,000decarreaua, capital (20%) $32,000andrew, capital (10%) $23,000bui, capital (70%) $19,000total liab./equity $103,000the percentages shown are the residual profit and loss sharing ratios. the partners dissolved the partnership on january 1, 2017, and began the liquidation process. during july the following events occurred: * receivables of $18,000 were collected.* all inventory was sold for $15,000.*all available cash was distributed on january 31, except for$8,000 that was set aside for contingent expenses.the book value of the partnership equity (i.e., total equity of the partners) on december 31, 2016 isa. $58,000b. $71,000c. $66,000d. $81,000
Answers: 1
You know the right answer?
Two plants are emitting a uniformly mixed pollutant called gunk into the beautiful sky over tourist...
Questions
question
Social Studies, 20.08.2019 12:30
Questions on the website: 13722367