By comparing the cost and benefits
Sometimes market activities (production, buying, and selling) have unintended positive or negative effects outside the market's scope. These are called externalities. As a policy maker concerned with correcting the effects of gases and particulates emitted by and local power plant, answer the following questions:What two policies could you use to reduce the total amount of emissions?Why do you think they each would work?What would the benefits of each action be (besides emissions reduction)?What would the costs of each action be?How would you decide what was the best level of emission reduction?
Read the specs of each and decide which best fits what you want to do
It would not shift the curve; it would be represented by moving from a point inside the curve toward the curve.
This will be dependent on the year of manufacture but the idea emission shoild be 1.00
We can control the emission by banning completely. These would be CFC's.
The effects of electricity might include the actual emission of electrons. This would include emission that causes lighting.
There are many companies which can help with debt reduction on both a for-profit and non-profit basis. You should consult a financial adviser to see which approach and program would work best for your level of debt and resources.
No. It is not possible for two metals to have the same emission spectrum. For metals to have the same emission spectrum, they would need for their electrons to have duplicate orbitals. That would be impossible due to the exclusion principle.
Not exactly. It would fall under Music Instructor. (If you decide to teach at a high school level)
that would be reduction division, i think :}
The effects of electricity might include the actual emission of electrons. This would include emission that causes lighting.
Reduction of wasting water would be better for our planet and us people.