Externalities, can lead to government intervention for a inefficient market economy, (Krugan, Wells, 2009, p. 434).  A common term to understand the basics of why policies are written to companies that are producing a good but an unintentional harm affects its consumer.  The perfect example is focused towards many power plants.  One certain power plant is coal, in which the burning of coal emits sulfuric dioxide that accounts for most of air pollution, (CoalEducation.org).  As a policy maker, you are try and persuade the government to enforce polices on a local coal power plant which has been known for its harmful emissions and causing nearby residents to develop several health problems.

            First policy is, thanks to Pew Center (Pewclimate.org), list’s several reasons why coal burning becomes a major problem for its gas emissions.  Although coal is a cheap source of energy, the ultimate downfall is that it’s responsible for nearly half of the world’s greenhouse gases.  In addition, much of USA is dependent on its electricity for coal burning.  This adds more greenhouse gases every day as coal is continued to be used.  As the USA, and other nations, maintains its dependency on coal, this will add to the demise of our home planet.  To begin with, these gases create the often called “Global Warming Effect”, (EDF.org).  In a brief summary: since the 1700’s an increase in greenhouse gases have increased due to industrialization; an increase which the Earth cannot naturally discharge; this creates a blanket in the atmosphere that is heating the Earth’s surface more each year.  Examples include: extreme weather, thinning ice/icing seas, threat to human health, (EDF.org).  If we fail to reduce such gases from coal emissions, this “Global Warming Effect” will be the very destruction of our planet unless we can make a change. 

            Second policy is thanks to Health and Environment Alliance, (Env-Health.org), is focused more on health, specifically in the EU, but can still apply to USA because all humans have health in common with each other.  This policy points out that a reduction on emission gases could save the nation millions, if not billions of dollars on health care due to the harmful effects of gas emissions.  Some problems have been known to affect blood, central nervous system, and also cause cancer (BBC.co.uk).  There are many more health problems that begin from gas emission.

            The reasons why these policies should be enforced on this power plant is because public and government are growing more concerned with the safety of its people and the world as a whole.  During his current presidency, President Barrack Obama has taken a significant part into supporting cleaner energy.  His roles in support for Recovery Act Investments for Clean Energy involves manufacturing cleaner energy technology, advancing in vehicle technologies, renewing and improving the electric grids throughout USA, (WhiteHouse.gov).  Moreover, these policies will also help the power plant understand why consumers demand the emission reduction.  In recent news, locals of Bokoshie, OK were fed up with getting sick due to the effects of their provided power plant, (Bartlesvillelive.com). If the policies are placed, the community can look forward to a safer and cleaner environment without having to worry much about health problems.  Another reason is if residents have no need to worry, new development may occur and over a period of time, that means more customers to provide for.  Placing these policies can benefit both the families of the community, as well as the investors of the power plant.

            An estimated cost to reducing emission in USA will be an average of $50 billion annually or $1.1 trillion by 2030, (EnergyandCapital.com).  If the coal power plant uses a “Carbon Capture and Sequestration” (CSS), the cost to produce electricity can expect to increase by 15-80%, (ClimateCentral.org).  Investors to the power plant may consider increasing rates on electricity by means of reducing emission, which will also reduce health risks.  As a result, consumers will pay less on healthcare and can compensate to an increased electricity rate.  An option other than CCS is a nuclear power plant.  By converting coal power plants to nuclear power plants the cost will pay itself off in the long run, (CBO.gov).  Overall the cost will be expensive, but the investment well worth it.  Aside from converting to nuclear, it would be best, if not cheaper if the power plant was forced to investing in CCS and get involved with the community.  This is also another option for the power plant can get involved with the community and reduce the consumption of electricity.  According to Nick Hodge, the most economic way to reduce emissions is upgrade HVAC and insulations in buildings, (EnergyandCapital.com).      Inevitably, people will speak up and the power plant will have to react or face the consequences.

Sir Shannon Scott Williams

January 24^th, 2010

ECON220

Unit 3: Discussion Board

            Let us begin with importing, goods and services purchased from other countries, (Krugan, Wells, 2009, p. 196).  A good example of an imported clothing company is Jayli Imports, which is a company that specializes in “Bohemian style hippie wear”, (Jayli.com).  The current best selling product for Jayli, is the Long Halter Pumpkin Dress.    

Next, exporting, goods and services sold to other countries, (Krugan, Wells, 2009, p. 196).  The perfect example is Carhartt “100% made in the USA since 1889”, (Carhartt.com).  My favorite product is the 8” Logger/Linemen Boot.

            After reviewing importing/exporting between Jayli and Carhartt, I see that most imported products from Jayli are less durable compared to Carhartt products.  Jayli may be designed for fashion purposes; where as Carhartt’s products are designed for hard-working purposes.  However, I know many people in Georgia that wear Carthartt clothing just for fashion reasons.  Nevertheless, if one is to buy an imported durable product, it’s likely that it will be more expensive versus a durable exported product.  For example, on my honeymoon vacation, my wife and I went shopping in Stockholm, Sweden.  While shopping, I came across a several pairs of Chuck Taylor’s Converse Sneakers.  Domestically in the USA, the average prices for these are around $40.  However in Sweden, they sold for more than $120, the most expensive shoe in the store.  Another situation is when I was also browsing Armani clothing.  In Sweden it is fairly reasonable, however in the USA, Armani can be very expensive.

            In my point of view, I prefer quality.  If I am to purchase a product, price is next in line for my criteria.  So when I look for a product, imported/exported may have the same quality but if one is more expensive just because it is imported, then I would rather purchase the domestic product because it’s cheaper.  In addition, I would rather purchase a domestic product to support the national employment, than seeing many fellow Americans without jobs.  Products of the fashion industry produced in the USA, help supply job for those who live there.

Armstrong, Kotler. (2009). Introduction to Marketing (9^th Ed.).

            Jayli Imports. (2007). Jayli clothing style. (Jayli.com). Retrieved 1.25.2011, from,

Carhartt. (2011). Carhartt motto. (Carhartt.com). Retrieved 1.25.2011, from, http://www.carhartt.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/HomeView?storeId=10051&catalogId=10101