Climate Change Regulation Paper

Climate change is not a new concept. It has been mostly referred to as global warming in the past. As much as people would like to file this issue away as something to deal with at a later date, it simply cannot wait. This problem we face is costing us billions of dollars, forests and wildlife are being eliminated, and people are dying. Starting to sound like a big deal, right? Future generations will be affected the most. People who do not even exist will have to pay for what we, all people, have done to this earth. To begin to make changes, one must realize the severity of the issue. Bill Mckibben, author of “Recalculating the Climate Math,” conveys that “We’ve already raised the world’s temperature by one degree—enough to melt almost half the ice in the Arctic, kill off huge swaths of the world’s coral, and unleash lethal floods and drought. July and August tied for the hottest months ever recorded on our planet, and scientists think they were almost certainly the hottest in the history of human civilization” (Page 3 of 5). Global climate change is a serious problem because it increases natural disasters and is the cause of extreme weather.

“For example, the federal government regulates the quality of food and water, the safety of workplaces and airspaces, and the integrity of the banking and finance system.” (Bianco, Canon 2011, p 582) Regulations find out if the product is a market failure. There are two types of regulations, which are economic and social. “Economic regulations sets prices or conditions on entry of firms into an industry, where as social regulation address issues of quality and safety.” (Bianco, Canon 2011, p 582) Economic regulations are concerned with the price regulation of monopolies.

Some challenge that the most efficient regulator is free-market competition among those seeking to attract the buying public. They argue that government regulation is intrusive with the marketplace and works to the disadvantage of both consumers and producers. Advocates of government regulation, however, see a better need to observe and guide the path of competition. They believe that an entirely unrestrained market will unavoidably lead to monopolistic practices, higher costs, underserved segments of society, and lower-quality goods and

By limiting the amount of pollution will diminish the risk of health problems caused by these toxins. Now many industries have gotten involved with a technique called carbon trading in which those with high pollution releases buy the rights to pollute from others with low amounts of releases. This is a controversial approach to reduce pollution because it allows unnecessary amounts of pollution to be released. If companies chose to sell their rights, what they sell would not have been used in the first place; now they will be used by companies who can afford to purchase them. It is extremely expensive to purchase these rights, however some major companies can do so.

The regulatory measures target the emissions from industries as well as the products resulting from certain industries. The agency establishes certain regulations that seek to standardize the emissions in terms of quantity and if companies are found

The public interest theory of regulation, or economic theory of regulation states that industrial regulation is essential in maintaining a natural monopoly. Natural monopolies turning into a regular monopoly charging monopoly prices can be harmful to society. Something that everyone most generally uses or needs like public resources i.e. electricity and water. Almost every person in our society requires these resources. The initial cost for creating a firm that can provide these services is high. Some startup cost can include power stations as well as power lines, labor costs, the cost of producing the power, and many other costs. These naturally occurring costs can often bar entry or discourage entry into the industry. In the event that a firm does make it into the industry and starts producing these public resources such as

Pollution is a major issue in many communities. It affects the local population and the number of people moving to the area, in addition to the potential workforce. If externalities result in an unsafe community, it will result in fewer residents and less economic growth. Government controls on pollution is very effective if patrolled. Many regulations are not monitored, thus companies often find ways to avoid the regulations. Government officials need to

In my opinion we have to have environmental regulations to sustain the environment we have today. Many people claim that these regulations restrict business which I think is true and so does Melanie J. Martin in one of her articles she states “Businesses may see certain environmental laws in a negative light if they must adapt their practices and increase spending to comply with regulations.” And if a company is struggling to make it by as it is I don’t think they will survive after paying out of pocket to comply with new regulations. The laws we have in place today in Texas I think get the job done and their not to extreme.

The real question is regulation good for Americans? Let's say for example that the President of the United States passes legislation concerning energy efficiency standards on engines. What this means is, the engines that we are familiar with, cannot meet some of these new standards. Furthermore, this means that a factory that makes non-efficiency engines is likely to close its doors. Likewise, this also means that other kinds of engines, that can meet the new energy efficiency standards, are in demand. Furthermore, this would include factories that make these new kinds of engines to likely expand, and hire more employees. If we look at the big picture we know that there are job losses, and there are job gains associated with regulation, it tends to balance each other out.

When looking at the map of states that voted against this we should devide them into those which are vulnerable to climate effects and voted against to convince them on increasing economic pressures derived from inaction in their own states and neighboring states (peer pressure). Then, with those that depend primarily in fossil fuel exploitation (coal mines, oil fields) we should work on the benefits of increase research and development of low carbon technologies within the fossil fuel industry, investment in research and development of cleaner fuels and more efficient processes can be accompanied by technology transfer tax breaks. Emphasis should be made on the fact that this newer industry will create an increasing amount of green jobs the young population could benefit from. It means shifting maintenance investment in the oil and gas industry to the development of a whole new industry that will yield high paying specialized jobs.

Another key question is why do we have regulation? Regulation is meant to serve the best interest of the public. Regulation can serve the private interest, public interest or both. Almost every aspect of our daily life is regulated (as per Regulation: A Primer, page 1). Regulation is very comprehensive to the point that it extends to the moment we wake up to the moment we go back to bed at night. In the morning, there are regulations that dictate which airwaves are used by your radio station; in addition, food and drug agencies regulate the content of your toothpaste, soap,

Regulations are meant to protect the environmental and consumers. They take the form of permits, package, etc

In this research paper, I will discuss what climate change is and what causes it. I will also describe how the political and scientific communities differ on the topic. Next, I will discuss the causal chain of climate change starting with the Industrial Revolution until today. After that I will cover the differing beliefs of Democrats and Republicans, and what each party is doing in regards to climate change. Lastly, I will cover what is being done by businesses, governments, and individuals in the world to combat climate change, and provide possible solutions, including the use of renewable energies to solve this problem.

Fees and regulations are similar to taxes. The government charge all firms the same fee and to set the same standard for all firms. This will achieve the same level of emission reduction at a lower cost for all firms and firms will have an incentive to reduce their emissions.

Another psychological element is found in the regulations of the system. Foremost, contingency occurs in the regulations. Here knowledge allows industries to know how penalties work in a way that makes sense to them (money). For instance, companies need to be given numbers or percentages of the importance to complying with the allowances they are given, so that they violations do not occur. Furthermore, giving companies the estimated reduction in cost that they will experience by complying will allowed the companies to want to keep their emissions by implementing new plans that will help achieve this, thus the incentives provide positive reinforcement. On the other side of the spectrum, if violations occur companies have to deal with penalties, which may be monetary (negative punishment).