A new supply-shifting policy of the state will have three direct effects in a specific river basin experiencing scarcity: • Supply will be shifted rightward for Upriver City; the net benefits of this shift to all of the city's water users has been estimated to be $5 million. The additional water use will result in the production of an added $2 million in output (market value). With a conservatively estimated multiplier of 2.3, secondary economic effects will amount to $4.6 million in the city. Supply will be shifted leftward for Downriver Irrigation District; the properly measured net "benefits" of this shift across all district irrigators is -$2 million. The value of farm output will be lowered by $1 million in the district. The secondary effects multiplier for the farm sector is 2.5. Between the city and the district is a river segment which will suffer some environmental degradation as a result of decreased flow. Some of these losses have been completely valued at $500,000. The remaining losses have not been valued. Is this a desirable policy for the river basin?

A new supply-shifting policy of the state will have three direct effects in a specific river basin experiencing scarcity: • Supply will be shifted rightward for Upriver City; the net benefits of this shift to all of the city's water users has been estimated to be $5 million. The additional water use will result in the production of an added $2 million in output (market value). With a conservatively estimated multiplier of 2.3, secondary economic effects will amount to $4.6 million in the city. Supply will be shifted leftward for Downriver Irrigation District; the properly measured net "benefits" of this shift across all district irrigators is -$2 million. The value of farm output will be lowered by $1 million in the district. The secondary effects multiplier for the farm sector is 2.5. Between the city and the district is a river segment which will suffer some environmental degradation as a result of decreased flow. Some of these losses have been completely valued at $500,000. The remaining losses have not been valued. Is this a desirable policy for the river basin?

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

14th Edition

ISBN:9780190931919

Author:NEWNAN

Publisher:NEWNAN

Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1QTC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

A building manager needs to replace an air condenser and is considering two models. One of the models is more energy efficient and is expected to yield savings of around $201 per year over the next three years but it costs $385 more. If the firm uses an opportunity cost of 10% for investment decisions. What is the NPV of buying the more energy efficient model (rounded to the nearest dollar)?
Answer all parts of the econ problem
A) It is possible to attain a higher curve by due to technological advancements. B) Point A is not a feasible option. C) Point A'' dominates point A'. D) It is possible to attain a higher curve by modifying the order in which the technologies are adopted.
The goal of the local Agenda 21 Program was to help communities generate activities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. According to its website, Environment Canada planned to sponsor individual and community actions to promote sustainable development and greener societies for $6 million in 1997, and $5.2 million in 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001. a) Display each item along an appropriate timeline. b) Find the formula and compute the present value of the Agenda 21 Program in 2023 dollars (using a 5% annual discount rate), c) Suppose that this program is the only action Canada undertakes in this domain. If some economists at Environment Canada claimed that the Action 21 Program is worth undertaking, because the amount you calculated in b) is equivalent to the change in consumer surplus (in the relevant markets, say for medical care, etc.) due to living in a greener environment, would you agree or disagree with these economists? Explain.
Respond to the question with a concise and accurate answer, along with a clear explanation and step-by-step solution, or risk receiving a downvote. Assume a reservoir’s water supply of 25,000 acre-feet of water can be used for municipal (m) and/or agricultural (a) purposes. The total benefits for each use are described as: TBa = 1000Wa – 0.025Wa2 So, the Marginal Benefit for agriculture is: MBa = 1000 – 0.05 Wa TBm = 1500Wm – 0.1Wm2 So, the Marginal Benefit for municipal purposes is: MBm = 1500 – 0.2 Qm Where Wa is acre feet of water used in agriculture and Wm is acre feet of water used for municipal purposes b. Suppose an additional 1,000 acre feet of water could be had by constructing a new reservoir. What is the new efficient allocation of water for each category of use?
1
The federal government is considering closing down a substantial portion of the John Day Fossil Beds in Oregon and selling the land to private interests. In considering this policy, economists advise the government to choose the option that has the highest net present value. They consider costs and benefits into the infinite future.Closing the fossil beds provides an immediate $3 million from the sale of the land andan annual savings of $100,000 in reduced maintenance costs. However, recreational users and conservationists no longer derive any benefit from the land, losing $500,000in benefits annually. a) If the discount rate is r = 2.5%, are the benefits of closing the monument larger than the costs?
Q: Determine whether the following statemnts are true or false: a) If the firm increases the volume of used resources by 30%, and the volume of production thus increases by 20%, then there is a positive effect of the production scale. b) Average fixed costs decrease as production increases. c) The economic profit usually exceeds the accounting profit.