a. Suppose that the carbon sequestration that results from planting a tree is worth $4. Graph the social cost curve that accounts for the positive externality of trees. Instructions: Use the tool provided 'MCsocial and plot only the two endpoints across the range of output (0-80). b. Ignoring the positive externality. trees will be planted. trees. c. The socially optimal quantity of trees is: [ d. Graph the deadweight loss that occurs when suppliers are unable to capture the $4 external benefit they provide from planting trees. Instructions: Use the tool provided DWL to illustrate this area on the graph. Drag the points to move or resize The deadweight loss when suppliers are unable to capture the $4 external benefit they provide from planting trees is: $[

a. Suppose that the carbon sequestration that results from planting a tree is worth $4. Graph the social cost curve that accounts for the positive externality of trees. Instructions: Use the tool provided 'MCsocial and plot only the two endpoints across the range of output (0-80). b. Ignoring the positive externality. trees will be planted. trees. c. The socially optimal quantity of trees is: [ d. Graph the deadweight loss that occurs when suppliers are unable to capture the $4 external benefit they provide from planting trees. Instructions: Use the tool provided DWL to illustrate this area on the graph. Drag the points to move or resize The deadweight loss when suppliers are unable to capture the $4 external benefit they provide from planting trees is: $[

Economics For Today

10th Edition

ISBN:9781337613040

Author:Tucker

Publisher:Tucker

Chapter14: Environmental Economics

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 7SQ

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider two approaches to reducing emissions of CO2 into the environment from manufacturing industries in the United States. In the first approach, the U.S. government makes it a policy to use only predetermined technologies. In the second approach, the U.S. government determines which technologies are cleaner and subsidizes their use. Of the two approaches, which is the command-and-control policy?
Suppose a city releases 16 million gallons of raw sewage into a nearby lake. Table 12.8 shows the total costs of cleaning up the sewage to different levels, together with the total benefits of doing so. (Benefits include environmental, recreational, health, and industrial benefits.) Using the information in Table 12.8, calculate the marginal costs and marginal benefits of reducing sewage emissions for this city. See Production, Costs and Industry Structure if you need a refresher on how to calculate marginal costs. What is the optimal level of sewage for this city? Why not just pass a law that films can emit zero sewage? After all, the total benefits of zero emissions exceed the total costs.
In the Land of Purity, there is only one form of pollution, called gunk. Table 12.14 shows possible combinations of economic output and reduction of gunk, depending on what kinds of environmental regulations you choose. Sketch a graph of a production possibility frontier with environmental quality on the horizontal axis, measured by the percentage reduction of gunk, and with the quantity of economic output on the vertical axis. Which choices display productive efficiency? How can you tell? Which choices show allocative efficiency? How can you tell? In the choice between K and L, can you say which one is better and why? In the choice between K. and N, can you say which one is better, and why? If you had to guess, which choice would you think is move likely to represent a command-and-control environmental policy and which choice is more likely to represent a market-oriented environmental policy, choice L or M? Why?
The rows in Table 12.7 show three market-oriented tools for reducing pollution. The columns of the table show three complaints about command-and-control regulation. Fill in the table by stating briefly how each market-oriented tool addresses each of the three concerns.
From an economic perspective, is it sound policy to pursue a goal of zero pollution? Why or why not?
Would environmentalists favor command-and-control policies as a way to reduce pollution? Why or why not?
Assume that the marginal private costs of a film producing fuel-efficient can; is greater than the marginal social costs. Assume that the marginal private benefits of a firm producing fuel efficient cars are the same as the marginal social benefits. Discuss one wags.r that the government cans ï¬‚y to increase production and sales of fuel efficient cars to the socially desirable amount. Hint: the government is flying to affect production through costs, net benefits.
Is zero pollution an optimal goal? Way or why not?
Radio stations, tornado sirens, light houses, and street lights are all public goods in that all are nonrivalrous and nonexclusionary. Therefore why does the government provide tornado sirens, street lights and light houses but not radio stations (other than PBS stations)?
Refer to Table 12.2. The externality created by the refrigerator production was 100. However, once we accounted for both the private and additional external costs, the market price increased by only 50. If the external costs were 100 why did the price only increase by 50 when we accounted for all costs?
The Junkbuyers Company travels from home to home, looking for opportunities to buy items that would otherwise end up with the garbage, but which the company can resell or recycle. Which will be larger, the private or the social benefits?
What is an externality?