what are examples of non-economical tradeoffs?

Question

i need help with this i think its a trick question

Answer 1

What about the wonderful tasting meal that we have to exercise off, or something that looks good, but isn’t comfortable? Good looking dude, with an attitude.
An undeveloped coastal area that is storm resistant, and protects interior land?
Big trees around your house that provide shade, but require maintenance?

Answer 2

Rivers are a challenging arena for the economic study of natural resources, an area of study that seeks an understanding and explanation of the use, allocation, and conservation of scarce resources. Because fresh water, fish habitats, and forests are scarce, hard choices must be made. Such choices involve trade-offs between Columbia River fish and wildlife projects versus hydropower, river navigation, and irrigated agriculture. Each mix of river uses presents a unique set of costs and benefits, with economic impacts distributed across various communities and economic sectors.

Answer 3

I trust you. i'm catholic. I appreciate all religions and anticipate different religions to appreciate mine. i think of human beings argue because of the fact different religions continuously come at you attempting to alter you. I actual have in no way met a catholic that is going around door to door attempting to sell faith. no person likes it whilst somebody includes your place and basically tells you that your faith is undesirable. maximum of those human beings have been catholic first of all yet abruptly whilst some thing is going incorrect of their existence and that they turn it around they say that they've been doing undesirable because of the fact their faith grew to become into incorrect whilst basically it grew to become into them no longer taking accountability for his or her movements.

Answer 4

uhhh well i think it is a trick question also.
~peace~

Answer 5

1.European Launchers and Electric Propulsion Spacecraft: Building up the "Perfect Relationship"

The increasing use of Electric Propulsion (EP) on modern spacecraft introduces different operational requirements on the launcher than for conventional spacecraft.
These requirements involve issues such as:


Injection strategies
Ground operations and control
Relaxation of launch windows
The impact on the launcher is even more relevant in the case of a dual launch, when only one of the spacecraft makes use of EP.

On the other hand, a "less demanding" EP-satellite that will rely more on its own capability to do the orbit transfer could also be a "less performing" one from the point of view of the Operators, because it might start its in-orbit operations later, or might see its operational life reduced.
In addition, issues as insurance (launcher vs. spacecraft using the EP for the orbit transfer), cost of control from the ground during the transfer, reliability, etc. are also to be considered in an overall assessment of the
"launcher / EP-spacecraft partnership".

The "optimum" service can only be provided as a result of a careful evaluation of the share of the operational responsibilities between the launcher and the spacecraft.

Europe, as producer of both launchers and EP-spacecraft, is in the position to deal with the previous issues and to eventually propose solutions and maybe standards that will improve the European capability and competitiveness of the whole service.
In particular a good coordination between launcher and satellite industry will reduce the overlapping of requirements that eventually reduces the overall service performances.

Following discussions with European industry (in the launcher, spacecraft and propulsion areas), with Arianespace and the CNES, ESA is taking the initiative to promote an European Working Group on the mentioned issues, involving all the interested parties, including the satellite operators.
A first workshop on the subject will take place at ESTEC in September.
An industrial study, to be performed in the frame of the GSP, will be the ideal complement to the work to be performed by this Working Group in the period 2003-2004.
Furthermore, it will contribute to the recognition of the ESA leadership and coordination of this important initiative.

The study shall perform a detailed assessment of all the issues related to the interactions and constraints between electric propulsion based satellites and the hosting launcher.
The aspects to be analysed shall be:


Technical (involved technologies, operational strategies, etc.)
Programmatic (technology readiness status, industrial scenario, launcher and satellite evolution, etc.)
Economical (trade offs on costs vs. return of investments for different strategies, market projections, insurance, etc.)
Legal (regulation and patent restrictions, etc.).
The activities shall be mainly subdivided into two blocks:


Short term (2002-2010): i.e. Ariane 5 ECA and ECB with @BUS
Long term (beyond 2010): i.e. future Ariane with full EP satellites.
In the first block the industrial team shall approach the study taking into account the constraints introduced by the current design of spacecraft and launcher, trying to identify the areas where possible ameliorations can be introduced in order to improve the overall service.
Important issues typical of the current situation are, among the others:


Low flight heritage of EP systems
Low risk-acceptance attitude of insurers
Limited upper-stage re-ignition capability in the short-term
Conservatism of satellite operators (different between large and small organisations).
In the second block the study shall be more proactive thanks to the design still open for future launcher and spacecraft, and shall lead to the proposition of standard design requirements for both launcher and EP-satellites, aiming to the maximization of the overall service competitiveness.

The advancement status and the final result of the study shall be periodically presented and discussed with the Working Group mentioned in point III, that will have therefore the possibility to interact with the study team and to possibly steer the remaining part of the activity.
In such a way, the final recommendations deriving from the study can be presented jointly by the study team and the Working Group.

2. Trade-offs in selection of these methodologies
The most economical and beneficial method of assessing inshore fisheries resources is unquestionably the involvement of schools and village councils in providing basic information about village catches and fishing effort. Not only was this the least expensive method, the benefits of having the students and village people study and become aware of the fish stocks and their biological needs leads directly towards effective and sustainable development of the resource. This awareness lead to a follow-up project funded by usAID">AusAID called the Village Fisheries Extension Programme, described above and in the following section on monitoring.

Agriculture household surveys conducted by teams of government people are far less efficient and are generally done so infrequently as to be useless in terms of resource management. They do, however, offer a method of cross-checking or augmenting information gained by community data gathering.

The large scale FAO/UNDP survey used a broad range of techniques and information to achieve a composite look at the inshore fishery and the various factors that influence its condition. This project is still in progress, with the survey and mapping process extended to the island of Savaii (Zann, personal communication February 1997). The maps and information in the atlas are intended for all levels of fisheries management and will certainly be of great benefit to Samoa when (and if) it becomes generally available.

All too often such reports are reproduced in limited quantity and distributed to experts and offices where they remain essentially unused. The authors stated that the atlas is to be available to the growing environmental movement, schools, nutritionists and especially the village councils and it is hoped this actually happens. As the report is in English and often involves technical terms and ideas, it is doubtful whether the rural fishers or village fonos will find the work of much practical use. The environmental organisations and schools will find the atlas of use, but only if it keys in with ongoing NGO or educational projects.

The information may be of use to the Fisheries Division in establishing long-term changes in the inshore fishery, but this assumes that at some point(s) in the future there will be funds and sufficient interest to repeat the interviews and census process.

Surveys by outside experts have the advantage to Samoa of being free and involving little or no effort on the part of the limited Fisheries Division staff. The experts are likely to be more knowledgeable about their particular field (corals or fish) than anyone in the country. The disadvantage is that the experts often limit their studies to their own scientific interests. The 1995 survey by Green, for example, targeted lush coral growth on the outer reef slope and did not provide information on the highly stressed areas of the reefs and lagoons.

Gillett and Sua (1987) list a total of 540 references (mostly unpublished reports and notes) on fisheries and marine resources of Samoa. Only nine references are on reefs and only two of these were published in the scientific literature. Few of the references are actually available in Samoa and none are available to the schools. No doubt such scientific surveys should be encouraged to help develop a fuller understanding of all aspects of the marine biota, but the practical impact of such studies for economic decision-making or decision-making by village fishers is doubtful.

Answer 6

ditto...sry

good luck champ :)

Answer 7

bartering