Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Mercury reduction with the use of money incentives

On the Augustachronicles website, a newspaper article “Olin must reduce its mercury output” written by Margie McClain. Outlines the issues toxic mercury has caused to her own community. McClain suggest that Olin Corporation should quickly implement and stress the use of mercury-free technology. However the issue is that more and more time is being given to Olin to continue emitting mercury toxins into the atmosphere and water. The plan is to quickly meet the needs to the Mercury pollution reduction act, by stopping the mercury production by 2013. Within these next 4 years it is very possible to modernize their plants says McClain.

By using mercury-free technology it can reduce the amount of emitted toxins in the atmosphere; however it can be very costly. This is why incentives are alternatives to fix the solution, and provide the company with the same results at a cheaper price. Since Olin provides many chemical products, it can be assumed that large amounts of waste and money are used to maintain such a production. For economic incentives to be active, government action must be in place. One method is by taxation; first a small tax must be in place for the amount of mercury emissions produced, this will slowly introduce the tax of emissions. At first there may not be large amounts of change since the tax can be close to only 3%, which the company can afford. However when the tax increases to nearly 10% the company itself will begin to reduce its emissions to decrease their liabilities.

In addition to the taxation method, another method that could be added for effectiveness is to provide certain financing to the company if they have improved their reductions. The financial help the government provides can aid the company to modernize with green technology. Overtime the company itself will produce fewer emissions.

Since there’s a possibility that Olin is not the only polluter, another solution is to introduce permits. They can be distributed among the different polluters which allow them to only pollute as much as their permit can allow. However you are not restricted to the amount of permits that are given at the begin; it is possible for trade to occur between companies, so long as permit covers the pollution emitted. By the end of the year the permits are collected, if the amount exceeds the permit then a heavy charge is put into place. The selling and trading of the permits allows the company to increase profits for the company to also expand and improve their own technology.

By using these economic incentives it is clearly seen as an advantage to promote changes towards green activity. Whether the use of taxation or permits both are effective methods to motivate industries to become more aware of the impact these different industries are having on the environment.

Reference:

"Olin must reduce its mercury output 111209 - The Augusta Chronicle." The Augusta Chronicle - Breaking news, sports, blogs, video, entertainment, shopping. Web. 17 Nov. 2009. .

2 comments:

  1. Nice article Newton, I quite enjoyed the way you stated the different opportunities and strategies the government can go about this pollution. The Only part of the question I could not seem to find what your thoughts were? You clearly introduce the methods of taxation but which one do you prefer? Other than that, It was quite interesting and made for a good read!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you did a really good job of organizing and analyzing your article. I thought it was affective the way that you said that the taxation method must be introduced slowly, this is an effective way to get people used to something new. I agree with you in that for change to happen quickly, there must be some sort of incentive. You listed many ways that would work effectively!

    ReplyDelete