电力弹性:越多越好吗?

Kenneth W. Costello
{"title":"电力弹性:越多越好吗?","authors":"Kenneth W. Costello","doi":"10.1002/gas.22375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Can we spend too much on transportation and occupational safety, pollution abatement and climate change mitigation? The answer for many, including climate activists, regulators, politicians, and policymakers, is “of course we can't.” How can one doubt that these activities are socially desirable, especially when they could help to avoid cataclysmic outcomes? For an economist, however, it is not so farfetched to think that we can spend too much. The simple Econ 101 explanation is that, at the margin, the additional benefits fall short of the additional costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":100259,"journal":{"name":"Climate and Energy","volume":"40 5","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Electric Power Resilience: Is More Better?\",\"authors\":\"Kenneth W. Costello\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/gas.22375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Can we spend too much on transportation and occupational safety, pollution abatement and climate change mitigation? The answer for many, including climate activists, regulators, politicians, and policymakers, is “of course we can't.” How can one doubt that these activities are socially desirable, especially when they could help to avoid cataclysmic outcomes? For an economist, however, it is not so farfetched to think that we can spend too much. The simple Econ 101 explanation is that, at the margin, the additional benefits fall short of the additional costs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100259,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Climate and Energy\",\"volume\":\"40 5\",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Climate and Energy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gas.22375\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Climate and Energy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gas.22375","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们在交通和职业安全、减少污染和减缓气候变化方面是否会投入过多?包括气候活动家、监管机构、政治家和政策制定者在内的许多人的答案是“我们当然不能”。人们怎么能怀疑这些活动在社会上是可取的,尤其是当它们有助于避免灾难性后果的时候?然而,对于一个经济学家来说,认为我们可以过度消费的想法并不是那么牵强。简单的经济学101解释是,在边际上,额外的收益低于额外的成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Electric Power Resilience: Is More Better?

Can we spend too much on transportation and occupational safety, pollution abatement and climate change mitigation? The answer for many, including climate activists, regulators, politicians, and policymakers, is “of course we can't.” How can one doubt that these activities are socially desirable, especially when they could help to avoid cataclysmic outcomes? For an economist, however, it is not so farfetched to think that we can spend too much. The simple Econ 101 explanation is that, at the margin, the additional benefits fall short of the additional costs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Community-Centered Grid Infrastructure Development The Value of International Engagement in Energy Education Assuring Energy Infrastructure Reliability and Resiliency Advanced Metering Infrastructure: Continued Evolution and Opportunities to Deliver Greater Value Can Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage Survive the Voluntary Financing Structure?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1