a) If the total benefits to society of achieving some specific level of pollution control are significantly greater than the total costs to society of doing so, will it necessarily be economically efficient (socially optimal) to do so? Explain your answer with words and a graph. b) In March 2011, the US EPA issued a report that looked at the results of the Clean Air Act from 1990 to 2020 (see: http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/prospective2.html). This review found that in the central estimate of the CAA’s impact, benefits exceeded costs by a ratio of 30 to 1. This leads some environmental policy commentators to conclude that the EPA had not gone far enough in reducing air pollution. Under what conditions would a benefit cost ratio of 30:1 imply that it would be economically efficient to further reduce air pollution under the CAA? Assuming the EPA’s benefit-cost estimate is correct, is it possible that it could actually be economically efficient to loosen, rather than strengthen, air pollution regulations? Explain your answer with words and a graph.

Principles of Microeconomics
7th Edition
ISBN:9781305156050
Author:N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:N. Gregory Mankiw
Chapter10: Externalities
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 10PA
icon
Related questions
Question

a) If the total benefits to society of achieving some specific level of pollution control are
significantly greater than the total costs to society of doing so, will it necessarily be
economically efficient (socially optimal) to do so? Explain your answer with words and a
graph.
b) In March 2011, the US EPA issued a report that looked at the results of the Clean Air Act
from 1990 to 2020 (see: http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/prospective2.html). This review
found that in the central estimate of the CAA’s impact, benefits exceeded costs by a ratio of
30 to 1. This leads some environmental policy commentators to conclude that the EPA had
not gone far enough in reducing air pollution. Under what conditions would a benefit cost
ratio of 30:1 imply that it would be economically efficient to further reduce air pollution
under the CAA? Assuming the EPA’s benefit-cost estimate is correct, is it possible that it
could actually be economically efficient to loosen, rather than strengthen, air pollution
regulations? Explain your answer with words and a graph.

Expert Solution
trending now

Trending now

This is a popular solution!

steps

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

Blurred answer
Knowledge Booster
Methods For Reducing Risk And Uncertainty
Learn more about
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, economics and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.
Similar questions
  • SEE MORE QUESTIONS
Recommended textbooks for you
Principles of Microeconomics
Principles of Microeconomics
Economics
ISBN:
9781305156050
Author:
N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Exploring Economics
Exploring Economics
Economics
ISBN:
9781544336329
Author:
Robert L. Sexton
Publisher:
SAGE Publications, Inc
Economics: Private and Public Choice (MindTap Cou…
Economics: Private and Public Choice (MindTap Cou…
Economics
ISBN:
9781305506725
Author:
James D. Gwartney, Richard L. Stroup, Russell S. Sobel, David A. Macpherson
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Microeconomics: Private and Public Choice (MindTa…
Microeconomics: Private and Public Choice (MindTa…
Economics
ISBN:
9781305506893
Author:
James D. Gwartney, Richard L. Stroup, Russell S. Sobel, David A. Macpherson
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Macroeconomics: Private and Public Choice (MindTa…
Macroeconomics: Private and Public Choice (MindTa…
Economics
ISBN:
9781305506756
Author:
James D. Gwartney, Richard L. Stroup, Russell S. Sobel, David A. Macpherson
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Economics:
Economics:
Economics
ISBN:
9781285859460
Author:
BOYES, William
Publisher:
Cengage Learning