2006-10-31 14:06:10 · 3 answers · asked by Shai 3 in Social Science ➔ Economics
No. As my Economics of pollution prof use to say, even cavemen polluted. So unless you want to go back to cavemen days (where we would still have an impact on the environment) then you have to accept that optimal pollution needs to be balanced out with the optimal level of goods you want to live comfortably. Maybe polluting less than now is optimal, but zero pollution is just as bad.
Funny thing was, the coarse was really Geography Economics, and half the class were Geography majors, the other half of us were Economics majors. The Geography types would all get up and argue with him for zero pollution.
The sollution is pretty good. Figure out the real optimal pollution, then charge for those that produce it.
2006-11-07 19:55:46 · answer #1 · answered by JuanB 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. To begin, such a thing is not possible. Also, if there was to be zero pollution comparing it to today's, then there would probably be other factors which would be considered pollutants as well. As human beings, we need to develop immunities and if we were to live in a zero pollution-environment, then the slightest sign of pollution would ressemble as a huge threat to our health.Thus, zero pollution would not be optimal because in such state losses would be greater than gains.
2006-11-08 19:55:22 · answer #2 · answered by Nayla B 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on what you mean by pollution. Is the carbon dioxide you exhale pollution, there's only one way to get that to zero.
I think the notioin of zero pollution is non-sense.
2006-10-31 22:10:12 · answer #3 · answered by Roadkill 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋