A firm’s own MAC function = -29Q + 298. Suppose the emission tax is $95/ton/month. a. Draw the firms’ MAC curve and find the efficient level of emissions for the firm. b. Then what would be the total tax bill and total abatement cost at the efficient level of emissions? As a result, what would be the total cost for the firm? c.Explain why the firm would not reduce its emissions to 1 ton/month.

A firm’s own MAC function = -29Q + 298. Suppose the emission tax is $95/ton/month. a. Draw the firms’ MAC curve and find the efficient level of emissions for the firm. b. Then what would be the total tax bill and total abatement cost at the efficient level of emissions? As a result, what would be the total cost for the firm? c.Explain why the firm would not reduce its emissions to 1 ton/month.

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter19: Externalities And Public Goods

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 19.9P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

A polluting firm’s marginal abatement cost is MACi = 50 – 0.25ei . If a regulator imposes a per-unit emissions tax of t = 10, what level of emissions does the firm choose under the tax? A polluting firm’s marginal abatement cost is MACi = 50 – 0.25ei . If a regulator imposes a per-unit emissions tax of t = 10, how many units did the firm abate relative to the unregulated environment?
Attached is the marginal abatement costs of three firms, related to the quantity of emissions. Each firm is now emitting 10 tons per week, so total emissions are 30 tons per week. Suppose we wish to reduce emissions by 50 percent, to 15 tons per week. Compare the total cost of doing this: (a) with an equi-proportionate decrease in emissions (b) with a decrease that meets the equi-marginal principle.
Suppose a small country, Country X, is considering implementing a Carbon Tax to address environmental concerns and reduce carbon emissions. The government believes that such a tax will have an impact on the country's economic performance. Given the following data: Current annual carbon emissions: 500,000 metric tons The government proposes a carbon tax of $30 per metric ton of carbon emitted. Calculate the potential change in annual carbon tax revenue if the country successfully reduces its carbon emissions by 20% after the implementation of the Carbon Tax.
Suppose that a firm's marginal abatement cost function with existing technologies is MAC = 12 - E. If the firm adopts new pollution abatement technologies, then its marginal abatement cost function will become MAC = 6 - 0.5E. With an emissions tax of $4, the benefits of adopting the new technologies equal $____. Please round your final answer to two decimal places if necessary. THE ANSWER IS NOT 16 Maybe 4?
Following are the marginal abatement costs of three firms . Suppose each firm is currently emitting 10 tons / week , so the total emissions are 30 tons / week . Suppose we wish to reduce total emissions by 50 % , to 15 tons per week . The following table provides marginal abatement costs for each firm . a ) What is the total cost if each firm cuts total emission by 50 % from their current levels . b ) What is the total cost if the total emissions decrease by 50 % ( to 15 tons per week ) that meets the equi - marginal principle . c ) From the society's point , which method of reducing ( a or b above ) emissions is better ? Provide a reason .
Imagine a firm with a marginal abatement cost (MAC) function equal to: MAC = 100 - 10E. The government introduces a per-unit tax on emissions equal to $20. For a profit-maximizing firm, total compliance costs (total abatement costs plus tax payment) are $____.
Consider two firms with the following marginal abatement costs (MAC) as a function of emissions (E): MAC1 = 10 - 2E1 MAC2 = 4 - E2 If both firms cut their emissions to zero, then total abatement costs (TAC) for both firms is ____. THE ANSWER IS NOT 17
Suppose that a firm's marginal abatement cost function with existing technologies is MAC = 16 - 2E. If the firm adopts new pollution abatement technologies, then its marginal abatement cost function will become MAC = 8 - E. If the government raises the emissions tax from $2 to $3, then the benefits of adopting the new technologies increase by $____. (Hint: recall that the benefits from adopting new technologies are simply the difference in total compliance costs.) Please round your final answer to two decimal places if necessary. Answer is NOT 2. All information is provided
Suppose that a firm's marginal abatement cost function with existing technologies is MAC = 16 - 2E. If the firm adopts new pollution abatement technologies, then its marginal abatement cost function will become MAC = 8 - E. If the government raises the emissions tax from $2 to $3, then the benefits of adopting the new technologies increase by $____. (Hint: recall that the benefits from adopting new technologies are simply the difference in total compliance costs.) Please round your final answer to two decimal places if necessary. Answer is not 2
Suppose we are happy with the current level of total emissions across two firms but, the current marginal abatement cost for firm 1 is $200 and the current marginal abatement cost for firm 2 is $250. Have we divided total emissions in the best way? Why or why not?
Imagine a firm with a marginal abatement cost (MAC) function equal to: MAC = 32 - 4E. The government offers a $8 per-unit subsidy for abatement. In principle, the firm could ignore the subsidy and continue to emit as many emissions as it was in the absence of government intervention, but there is money to be made from cutting back its emissions. Compared to ignoring the subsidy, how much money could a cost-minimizing firm save or make by cutting back its emissions? (Hint: remember that firms trade off the benefits of the subsidy with the costs of abatement when deciding how much to abate) Answer:
Suppose a country has two airlines. One is a small domestic airline that uses modern airplanes with lower CO2 emissions, and the other is a large international airline that uses older jumbo jets carrying hundreds of people at one time. A carbon emissions tax on airlines would be more efficient than a strict limit (command and control) on the total amount of carbon emissions each airline can produce. Two reasons that support this statement are: a. A carbon emissions tax would a.allow the larger airline to continue using its less efficient airplanes b.not allow the large airline to continue using its less efficient airplanes . b. A command-and-control policy would likely a.allow the larger airline to continue its service. b.force the larger airline to curb its service.