Summary: New ideas for better pollution control are constantly being proposed, but unfortunately these ideas are quickly shut down by the defenders of the status quote who says we can't afford them. They say, we could come up with cleaner technologies, but it would drag the economy down. "We're made to believe that it's a choice: protect air quality and human health or protect the economy." However, this assumption has been proven false by Matt Yglesias. According to Yglesias' recent studies a 10 ppd decrease in ozone concentrations increase worker productivity by 4.2 percent. Also, coal plants and factories cause hundreds of billions of dollars of damage to the economy annually. These facts can help us conclude that if we have better pollution control, then there will be better work productivity and our economy will benefit from it. Reaction: I thought this new study was extremely interesting. The people who are opposed to making air quality better have to realize that we can always rebuild our economy. Large amounts of pollution in the air causes people and animals to become extremely sick and it's really bad for the environment. These issues are clearly a important and serious then having the economy go down. Additionally, if better air quality is going to improve the productivity of workers, then over time it will benefit the economy as well.
1.) Do you think we should spend the money on better technology?
2.) What are other risks of having alot of air pollution in our air?
3.) Why do you think better air quality causes better work productivity?
No comments:
Post a Comment