This is Katherine Pranka's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Katherine Pranka's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Katherine Pranka
Recent Activity
I found this article interesting. While it was helpful having the cap and trade and tax systems spelled out like this, what I found most fascinating was the introduction about how the world needs to reduce carbon emissions, not just one country. I thought this went very well with what we discussed in class on Tuesday, and I appreciated the bluntness. I found it interesting that the key critieria were "keeping down overall policy costs, satisfying distributional objectives, addressing economic variability and disruptions, providing incentives for clean technology development, and facilitating policy coordination and verification among countries." This is not a simple list, and therefore difficult to achieve while keeping everyone happy. In my health economics in developing countries, we recently had a discussion on carbon emissions on health in developing countries, because the development is needed, but it has harmful effects on everyone in the world. I did find it interesting that overall, a tax would be most beneficial, which I understand, but it would be very difficult to enforce. Which is not to say that the cap-and-trade system would be enforced any better. Altogether, this is a very confusing system which needs the entire world to work together to fix.
Toggle Commented Mar 30, 2016 on ECON 255 for next Thursday at Jolly Green General
One of the most fascinating things from the articles was carbon sequestration. While a lot of the science stuff was harder to follow, I think that this way of storing carbon instead of releasing it into the atmosphere is the way to move forward. I think its fascinating that we would need storage for 1 trillion tonnes of CO2 which could easily be exceeded. I think its ridiculous that this has not already been put into effect. Also, why not start using space in outer space to store carbon in this way? If technology was made available for cheap, then this could also be an answer to many problems. Alternative energy sources are also the way to go. My German aunt and uncle bought a sun collector 20 years ago and sell some to their power company every year, and this year, not only was it paid off, but it also earned them a profit. Things like this need to become more common place in countries that are less "green" than Germany. And wind power. I think wind power is great, mostly because there are 5 wind farms in a 30 mile radius of where I lived. It was a great thing for everyone involved, because the farmers who leased out the land had a constant income, and the land was being conserved, because it was being built on and the nutrients weren't being depleted. Also, we had relatively clean energy for living in the middle of nowhere.
Toggle Commented Mar 16, 2016 on ECON 255 for next Thursday at Jolly Green General
I found this article incredibly interesting. Some of the detailed facts were shocking to me, but most of it was pretty straightforward. I wanted to talk about mountain top removal in my blog post, because I think it is so depressing. I love mountains, and they're one of the reasons I chose to come to Virginia for school, so I think it is really sad when someone decides to destroy that natural beauty. The utility for me to leave the mountains there is much higher, because I enjoy looking at the mountains more than I enjoy the coal that they provide. However the in mountain coal removal is so dangerous. I grew up about 30 minutes away from the site of one of the worst mining disasters in the history of the United States. It was always really sad driving past the hill once in a while. Therefore, I see the benefits of not sending miners into the mountain. However, I also just think that there should be better sources for energy than coal, because it is so inefficient. Therefore, my take away from this article is that we should be trying to find better energy sources.
Toggle Commented Mar 10, 2016 on ECON 255 for Thursday at Jolly Green General
If fisheries are continuously depleted, how can they fish be naturally reinstated to the environment without affecting the rest of the adapted wildlife?
Toggle Commented Feb 10, 2016 on More Chapters from Kahn at Jolly Green General
I think this article was fascinating, as I think it is very important to assign values to goods and services that do not have a face dollar value. I think it is worth it to invest in things like coral reefs and rain forests, because they all have value to someone, although some more than others. Also, the people who really want to experience things like scuba diving are more likely to pay more if it means that it will be pretty. Many people do not want to go to certain foreign countries because they believe that it is dirty. Places like China or India, where the air and water are polluted respectively, might drive people away, and therefore the town or country is losing income from tourists. It would be a good idea to raise the prices for the good, and that way, the raises in the price and can be absorbed by the town. I think that putting the value on things that generally don't have values is smart, because then the government can help by absorbing some of the costs and raising the value of the resource.
Toggle Commented Feb 3, 2016 on ECON 255 for next Thursday at Jolly Green General
I found this article interesting, especially when it addresses who should be held responsible for things like buildings casting shadows and buildings blocking wind from windmills. My personal opinion is that if it a requirement for your business, then you should invest in air rights and other ways to keep your business going. However, it also reminds me of the time when my town was putting a wind farm in, and everyone was very against it, because it "made the cows go crazy." What I considered the only valid argument against the wind mills was a couple who liked to watch the sunset from their porch and whose view would be blocked, so they asked for the windmill to be moved. The farmers who rent the land to the wind power company were all happy, because they had a guaranteed large income every year, added to the fluctuating corn and soybean prices. The idea of blame is an interesting one, and I think that people should be more aware of what potential problems will be for them.
Katherine Pranka is now following The Typepad Team
Jan 27, 2016