Placeholder Image

字幕表 動画を再生する

  • Adriene: Welcome to Crash Course Economics. I’m Adriene Hill

  • Jacob: And I’m Jacob Clifford. Economics is about choices, and how we use our scarce

  • resources. It’s not just about producing and consuming, it can also be about conserving.

  • Adriene: Maybe counterintuitively, economics has a lot to add to discussions of how we

  • can balance our desire for prosperity and growth, with the need to protect our natural

  • resources. Today we're going to look at environmental economics and think about how economics can

  • help us keep our planet livable.

  • [Theme Music]

  • Pollution is going to happen, it’s a by-product of human existence and there is no way that

  • we can get rid of it all. In fact, one of the ways we know about earliest the societies is by

  • looking at their trash heap, something archaeologists call middens, because it sounds better thandumps.”

  • But the fact that humans produce all kinds of waste doesn’t mean that we have to embrace

  • islands of trash floating in the oceans, a layer of smog over industrial cities, and

  • toxic chemicals in our rivers. For sake of simplicity though, were going to focus

  • on one type of pollution: carbon dioxide emissions. Theyre one of the primary greenhouse gases.

  • These greenhouse gases basically blanket the earth and are causing climate change.

  • CO2 levels are the highest they've been for millions years which is why environmentalists

  • consider it a “planetary emergency.” There's a lot of effort going into how to remove

  • greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, how to make cities more resilient to climate change,

  • but in the interest of time were going to focus on efforts to reduce the amount of

  • new pollutants getting spewed into our atmosphere.

  • Jacob: The economic solution is pretty simple. Step one, identify the sources of the most

  • air pollution. Done. We know exactly what it is. It’s factories that burn fossil fuels

  • for energy, industries that use oil and coal to produce things, and vehicles with internal combustion engines.

  • Step two, decrease the supply of these technologies and products or decrease the demand for them.

  • That’s it, it’s simple. But, the implementation of these policies gets complicated.

  • Let’s look at decreasing supply. As we mentioned in the last video, one of the biggest problems

  • with having countries independently enforce environmental regulations is the Tragedy of

  • the Commons. No one owns the atmosphere, so there is very little incentive for countries

  • to keep it clean and switch to expensive green technologies if no one else is going to. It’s

  • not like there is some global environmental police punishing countries for polluting.

  • While a country like Trinidad and Tobago has a huge carbon output per capita, its small

  • population means it’s only producing a small fraction of global CO2.

  • The other option is to decrease the demand for fossil fuels, possibly by finding alternate

  • green energy sources. But were already very reliant on fossil fuels, and markets

  • have made the production of those fuels very cheap. So, any new type of energy will have

  • a hard time beating the established system.

  • So we can either wait patiently for new technologies to develop and get cheaper, or we can speed

  • up the process by manipulating markets with government subsidies, taxes, and regulations.

  • Adriene: In the case of pollution, there are long-term side effects, like climate change,

  • that consumers often don’t take into account when they buy products. Remember negative

  • externalities? When the full cost of a product doesn’t line up with the costs that manufacturers

  • or consumers pay? Pollution represents a market failure -- a situation where markets fail to

  • produce the amount that society wants.

  • To address this, some economists argue that government intervention is not only justified,

  • but essential. There are all kinds of different ways intervention can happenall of them

  • meant to encourage producers and consumers to choose to pollute less.

  • One solution is for the government to come out and set very specific rules about how

  • much specific industries can pollute. Forget markets. You're gonna follow our pollution rules.

  • Another way governments encourage people to pollute less is by providing price incentives.

  • Those incentives can encourage individuals to make choices that are better for the environment.

  • The government could add taxes to gasoline purchases, or, on the other hand, provide

  • subsidies for people who drive electric cars.

  • Governments can also create permit marketsbasically setting a limit on how much

  • firms can pollute, and allowing those firms to buy and sell pollution permits. Youve

  • probably heard these calledcap and trade”. Proponents of cap and trade argue that it

  • can successfully limit emissions, without creating hard and fast rules that might hinder economic growth.

  • And, governments can subsidize the development of a specific technology or industryin

  • an effort to make that technology more competitive with the alternatives. A country might help

  • support the development of solar or wind energy.

  • As of 2014, around 10% of the energy consumed in the United States came from renewable sources,

  • which is pretty much in line with the global average. Current predictions are that by 2040

  • 15% of the world energy consumption will come from renewable sources.

  • But, alternative energy sources, for the most part, just aren’t cheap enough yet, so the

  • majority of our energy is likely to continue to come from non-renewable sources, at least for now.

  • Jacob: We don’t have the time to sit back and wait for new technologies to get cheaper,

  • and there's no guarantee that the technologies that the government picks will be cost effective.

  • Perhaps the solution is not to get rid of fossil fuels, but instead be more efficient with those fuels.

  • But that has drawbacks, too. Some energy economists argue that the expected gains from energy

  • saving technologies, are offset by something called the rebound effect. Let’s go to the Thought Bubble.

  • Adriene: Let’s say Hank uses a gallon of gas to drive to work everyday. Then, partially

  • to help the planet but mostly to help his wallet, he buys a new fuel efficient car that

  • only takes half a gallon of gas for the same commute.

  • He saves money and there's less pollution. It is a win-win. But the rebound effect says

  • that the benefits of energy efficiency might be reduced as people change their behavior.

  • With the money he saves, Hank might start driving more than he normally would or he

  • might go on a vacation in Hawaii. That leads to more consumption and possibly even more emissions.

  • Also, if greater fuel-efficiency makes driving less expensive it might encourage more people

  • to buy cars and increase the overall use of gasoline. And even if people didn't increase

  • their driving, the new fuel efficiency could decrease the demand for gas, making fossil

  • fuels cheaper and more readily available for other uses.

  • The possibility of the rebound effect doesn’t mean we shouldn’t invest in energy saving

  • technologies. It just means that we have to keep in mind how consumers will behave. It’s

  • also the reason why it's important to have economists involved in the discussion of environmental policy.

  • The tools of economics can help analyze the incentives and figure out what might work best.

  • Thanks Thought Bubble. Okay, so weve identified another problem. But before you get so angry

  • that you kick over a barrel of oil and light it on fire, keep in mind that there is hope.

  • Most countries are actively trying to address the problem of greenhouse gases.

  • The international community has been trying for decades to work together to protect the

  • environment with varying success. There are international treaties that commit countries

  • to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. UN negotiations are underway to create a new climate change

  • agreementthat could be adopted in December 2015.

  • Private companies and governments are also funding research into green technology.

  • In the U.S. the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 allocated billions to fund renewable energy.

  • China is also vowing to clean things up, and, in fact, leads the world in renewable energy

  • investment. So, now that most countries recognize there is a problem, the hope is that theyll

  • figure out a way, or more likely a lot of ways, to start addressing it. Environmental

  • economists say that is not just governments and producers that need to change, it’s

  • also consumers. Conserving and consuming more thoughtfully likely need to be a part of our

  • daily lives if we want to protect the environment.

  • But just bringing our reusable grocery bags to the store isn’t going to save the planet,

  • even if it says it on the bag. Bigger and more costly interventions like improving insulation

  • and changing thermostats might have more impact, but we need to recognize individual action

  • alone isn’t going to be enough. Industries, governments, and individuals; were in this

  • together. Thanks for watching, well see you next week.

  • Crash Course Economics is made with the help of all these fine people. You can support

  • Crash Course at Patreon, a voluntary subscription service where your support helps keep Crash

  • Course free for everyone forever. And you get great rewards! Thanks for watching and DFTBA.

Adriene: Welcome to Crash Course Economics. I’m Adriene Hill

字幕と単語

ワンタップで英和辞典検索 単語をクリックすると、意味が表示されます

B1 中級

環境経済学クラッシュコース経済学 #22 (Environmental Econ: Crash Course Economics #22)

  • 71 14
    Jane に公開 2021 年 01 月 14 日
動画の中の単語