Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Under an agreement with U.S. regulators, American Electric Power Company of Columbus, Ohio, has agreed to offset part of its 145million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions by paying another company to lay plastic tarps. These tarps cover farm lagoons holding rotting livestock wastes that emit methane gas 21times more damaging to the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. The annual methane produced by a typical 1,330pound cow translates into about 5metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year.

a. How many cows' worth of manure would have to be covered to offset the carbon dioxide emissions of this single electric utility?

b. Given that there are about 9 million cows in the United States in a typical year, what percentage of its carbon dioxide emissions could this firm offset if it paid for all cow manure in the entire nation to be covered with tarps?

Short Answer

Expert verified

(a) Carbon pollution of solitary electricity provider, 29million calves' amount or excrement will have to be blanketed.

(b) The percentage of its carbon dioxide emissions could this firm offset is 31.03%.31.03%.

Step by step solution

01

Introduction

Natural gas is still a on effect, it's a somewhat durable solvent, while combinations of gaseous and ether might keep this much as high as 14 percent. basis points helium per capacity are combustible. Detonations of such a sort having increased alarmingly throughout mines and steelworks, leading across several industrial disasters.

02

Explanation (a)

a. Both pipe energy provider creates 145millions of pounds of carbon dioxide.

It should always be emphasized that the one 1330-pound heifer (manure) releases 5tons of carbon every year.

Consequently, estimated number of cattle necessary fully counterbalance overall carbon pollution of such a particular utility company would indeed remark:

145million_metric_ton_ofCO25metric_ton_ofCO2

=29million

Because counteract a single electrical lender's whole climate impact, a million cattle' load clean dung must still be buried.

03

Explanation (b)

b. Whereas a typical year and have 9 million heifers. That amount of carbon created by several cows' feces is:

9million cows×5metric ton ofCO2per_Cow

localid="1652509624814" =45_metric_ton_of_CO2

That percent of carbon pollution avoided if a local electricity provider paid for blankets that hide all cattle fertilizers is:

45metric_ton_ofCO2145metric_ton_of_CO2

=31.03%

As both a result, the amount of Dioxide emissions mitigated as localid="1652683418238" 31.03%.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

The following table displays hypothetical annual total costs and total benefits of conserving wild tigers at several possible worldwide tiger population levels.

a. Calculate the marginal costs and benefits.

b. Given the data, what is the socially optimal world population of wild tigers?

c. Suppose that tiger farming is legalized and that this has the effect of reducing the marginal cost of tiger conservation by $15million for each 2,000-tiger population increment in the table. What is the new socially optimal population of wild tigers?

Distinguish between private costs and social costs and understand market externalities and possible ways to correct them.

How would the relocation of pollution-generating Chinese plants to other nations affect the optimal degree of air cleanliness in China? Explain briefly.

Suppose that a new chief of the government agency discussed in the problem decides to reduce the number of pollution allowances that firms are permitted to own. Evaluate the effects this policy change will have on the market price of pollution allowances and discuss whether the policy appears to be fully consistent with the original intent of creating the market for these allowances.

Consider the diagram in Problem 31-4, and answer the following questions.

a. Suppose that a new technology for reducing water pollution generates a reduction in the marginal cost of pollution abatement at every degree of water cleanliness. After this event occurs, will the optimal percentage degree of water cleanliness rise or fall? Will the cost incurred for the last unit of water cleanup increase or decrease? Provide a diagram to assist in your explanation.

b. Suppose that the event discussed in part (a) occurs and that, in addition, medical studies determine that the marginal benefit from water pollution abatement is higher at every degree of water cleanliness. Following both events, will the optimal percentage degree of water cleanliness increase or decrease? In comparison with the initial optimum, can you determine whether the cost incurred for the last unit of water cleanup will increase or decrease? Use a new diagram to assist in explaining your answers.

See all solutions

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free