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

Assume that scientific studies provide you with the following information concerning the benefits and costs of sulfur dioxide emissions:

Benefits of abating (reducing) emissions:MB= 500 - 20A

Costs of abating emissions:MC= 200 + 5A

whereAis the quantity abated in millions of tons and the benefits and costs are given in dollars per ton.

a. What is the socially efficient level of emissions abatement?

b. What are the marginal benefit and marginal cost of abatement at the socially efficient level of abatement?

c. What happens to net social benefits (benefits minuscosts) if you abate one million more tons than the efficient level? One million fewer?

d. Why is it socially efficient to set marginal benefits equal to marginal costs rather than abating until total benefits equal total costs?

Short Answer

Expert verified
  1. The socially efficient level for abatement is 12 million tons.

  2. The marginal benefit and marginal cost at the socially efficient level of reduction would be 260.

  3. In both cases, if one more million ton or fewer is abated from the efficient level, the social net benefit would fall.

  4. It is socially efficient to set marginal benefit equal to marginal cost rather than total benefits to total cost because we want to maximize the additional benefits given the additional cost.

Step by step solution

01

Determination of the socially efficient level 

The socially efficient level of abatement: marginal cost = marginal benefit

500 - 20A = 200 + 5A500 - 200 = 20A + 5A300 = 25AA =30025= 12

Therefore, the socially efficient level of abatement would be 12 million tons.

02

Marginal cost and benefit at a socially efficient level

The value of A is equal to 12. Therefore by substituting it in the marginal benefit and marginal cost equation, the marginal cost and marginal benefit be:

MB = 500 - 2012= 260MC = 200 - 512= 260

Therefore, both will be 260 at a socially efficient level.

03

The social net benefit would fall

The graph below depicts Marginal Benefit along the x-axis and Marginal Cost along the Y-axis.

Net social benefit is the area under the marginal benefit curve - the area under the marginal cost curve. At socially efficient level this area is = a+b+c+d, or

0.5500-20012=$1800

If you abate one million tons more, then it will be = a+b+c+d-e, or

1800-0.5265-2401=1800-12.5=$1787.5

If you abate one million fewer, then it will be = a+b, or

0.5500-28011+280-25511+0.5255-20011\hfill=$1787.5

In each case, Net Social Benefit will fall by 1800-1787.5=$12.5 million

04

Maximizing benefits

It is socially efficient to set the marginal cost equal to marginal benefits because equating the last unit of reduction's cost and benefits will help determine the optimal quantity. However, if we use total cost and total benefits, the net benefits will be zero since the sum of all costs will simplify become equal to some of the benefits, which would compensate for the difference in units.

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

There are three groups in a community. Their demand curves for public television in hours of programming, T, are given respectively by

W1 = \(200 -T

W2 = \)240 - 2T

W3 = \(320 - 2T

Suppose public television is a pure public good that can be produced at a constant marginal cost of \)200per hour.

a. What is the efficient number of hours of public television?

b. How much public television would a competitive private market provide?

Four firms located at different points on a river dump various quantities of effluent into it. The effluent adversely affects the quality of swimming for homeowners who live downstream. These people can build swimming pools to avoid swimming in the river, and the firms can purchase filters that eliminate harmful chemicals dumped in the river. As a policy adviser for a regional planning organization, how would you compare and contrast the following options for dealing with the harmful effect of the effluent:

a. An equal-rate effluent fee on firms located on the river.

b. An equal standard per firm on the level of effluent that each can dump.

c. A transferable effluent permit system in which the aggregate level of effluent is fixed and all firms receive identical permits.

Reconsider the common resource problem given in Example 18.6. Suppose that crawfish popularity continues to increase, and that the demand curve shifts from

C = 0.401 - 0.0064F to C = 0.50 - 0.0064F. How Does this shift in demand affect the actual crawfish catch, the efficient catch, and the social cost of common access? (Hint: Use the marginal social cost and private cost curves given in the example.)

The market for paper in a particular region in the United States is characterized by the following demand and supply curves:

QD= 160,000 - 2000PandQS= 40,000 + 2000P

whereQDis the quantity demanded in 100-pound lots,QSis the quantity supplied in 100-pound lots, andP is the price per 100-pound lot. Currently, there is no attempt to regulate the dumping of effluent into streams and rivers by the paper mills. As a result, dumping is widespread. The marginal external cost (MEC) associated with the production of paper is given by the curve

MEC = 0.0006QS.

a. Calculate the output and price of paper if it is produced under competitive conditions and no attempt is made to monitor or regulate the dumping of effluent.

b. Determine the socially efficient price and output of paper.

c. Explain why the answers you calculated in parts(a) and (b) differ.

Medical research has shown the negative health effects of โ€œsecondhandโ€ smoke. Recent social trends point to growing intolerance of smoking in public areas. If you're a smoker and you wish to continue smoking despite tougher anti-smoking laws, describe the effect of the following legislative proposals on your behaviour. As a result of these programs, do you, the individual smoker, benefit? Does society benefit as a whole?

a. A bill is proposed that would lower tar and nicotine levels in all cigarettes.

b. A tax is levied on each pack of cigarettes.

c. A tax is levied on each pack of cigarettes sold.

d. Smokers would be required to carry government-issued smoking permits at all times.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

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