Wind Turbine Energy- Parker Calandra

There were many previous beliefs that offshore wind energy was not very cost effective. However, new research in Denmark has suggested that wind turbines can produce energy cheaper than both combined-cycle gas turbines and nuclear power plants. This refutes a recent report by Ernst & Young (http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/files/library/publications/reports/EY-Offshore-Wind-in-Europe.pdf) that implies that offshore wind is still expensive and that it operates with a similar cost to the combined-cycle gas turbines. However, the data shows that two different Danish companies, Anholt and Horns Rev3, operate 14% and 37% cheaper than combined-cycle gas turbines respectively. This same data was compared to the new nuclear power plant project that was proposed at Hinkley Point in the UK. Anholt and Horns Rev3 deliver electricity 40% and 58% cheaper respectively than the projected costs of this new nuclear energy. While this is in Europe, the results are still significant and can be extrapolated to the United States in my opinion. If wind power is consistently producing cheap energy, we should start investing more resources into the industry. The results are very promising and it is also an environmentally conscious way to harness energy. 

Source: http://www.energypost.eu/myth-expensive-offshore-wind-already-cheaper-gas-fired-nuclear/

Tablets in K-12 Schools - JR Jackson

Ever since the release of the iPad, computer tablets have become more and more popular across the world. The features and capabilities of tablets has started a debate on whether we should reevaluate the way we educate students in K-12 schools. The idea would be to switch from print textbooks to digital textbooks on tablets. People for the use of tablets claim that they have the support of most teachers and students, citing that they are more convenient and improve test scores. In addition, the cost of a digital textbook is cheaper than the cost of a print textbook. Opponents of tablets believe that tablets are too expensive and distracting for students. It is a lot easier to break a tablet than a text book, and the implications with technology would increase the excuses for students not doing homework. Emerging technology would make heavy investments in current tablets obsolete in years to come.

Personally, I have somewhat of an experience with this debate. The year after I graduated, my high school implemented a tablet program for their students. My brother, who is in the grade below, told me about his experience with the tablet system. He agreed with the fact that they were very distracting and said they were mostly used for his own entertainment. So in the early stages of this tablet use, he believed it was ineffective. With that said, I do believe that it makes so much more sense to carry around a tablet than 5 heavy textbooks. Technology is cheaper than ever and is improving to where we can make tablets more durable. And if the core function of the tablet is to be able to read it like a textbook, should obsolete technology really even be a concern? I think the use of tablets in K-12 systems should be implemented, but only after considering ways to cater to some of the opponents’ valid concerns.

Massachusetts Headlights Law--Adam Soshnick

Recently a new law in Massachusetts has been put in place that requires all motorists to have their headlights and taillights on whenever their vehicle's windshield wipers are needed. The new law also states that lights needs to be on a half hour after sunset and half and hour before sunrise as well as whenever visibility is less than 500 feet. This law comes amid some controversy that the state government is using its power too much to interfere in trivial matters that could cause many peoples insurances premiums to increase.
I think that overall this law is a pretty good law and will help to prevent any unnecessary danger on the roads. Although the fine for breaching this law is only $5, insurance premiums could be driven up by a ticket. But overall that shouldn't be much of a problem as anyone should have their lights on whenever it is raining so this law will just make that explicitly clear as well as give people an incentive to drive in a more safe manner. I think that people shouldn't have their insurance premiums go up from just one offense of this nature but instead two or more should result in premiums going up. That is something up to the discretion of the individual insurance companies but one would expect them to adapt their policies to this new law. 

Oliver Stephenson - Oil Fracking

            A recent report by US News suggests that the oil fracking business that has boomed in the past decade poses a risk to the residents who surround the areas in which fracking take place.  As a process, fracking requires pumping large quantities of water, sand and least attractively, chemicals into the ground to break apart the earth and allow oil to flow towards the surface. As a whole, it has been responsible for some of the drop in oil prices the United States has seen over the past 6-8 months. Additionally, it has reduced the country’s dependence on the Middle East for our oil supply.

In the report, which studied over 150 papers on the potential second-hand risks associated with proximity to fracking and other oil wells, it was suggested that individuals living close to these areas are 10% more likely to face birth defects that those not near these areas.  Moreover, studies underscored that exposure to several of the materials used in fracking has also rendered women unable to conceive. While a direct relationship has not yet been completely identified, this study marks just the latest in what has been a controversial run for this relatively new method of obtaining oil. Over the next few years, there will likely be a call for a final policy decision to be made regarding its legitimacy. For now, we are all forced to bare the question: is cheap oil worth the consequence?

http://www.usnews.com/news/special-reports/energy-of-tomorrow/articles/2014/12/05/fracking-linked-to-infertility-miscarriages-birth-defects

California Water Restrictions - Emily Lundberg

This week, California Governor Jerry Brown announced mandatory water restriction policy. For the past three years, the state of California has been in a draught, raising questions about the availability of fresh drinking water down the road. The lack of snow this winter due to the absence of the La Nina weather phenomenon left little hope of nature running its course and solving the problem on its own. Over the next nine months, California cities are trying to reduce water consumption by 25 percent. To enforce this new policy, the Governor Brown has instructed local water agencies to adjust their billing rates and discourage water waste. Whether this policy will actually be enforced or not is a large concern. The water agencies must provide enough incentive to decrease consumption by 25 percent, a large cut in current usage patterns.

Although the California mandate does not specifically spell out exact restrictions on water usage for agriculture, there will surely be spillover economic effects into California’s agriculture industry. Despite labor issues and negative effects from regulations, the dairy industry has been able to lower costs and compete by growing feed locally. Growing feed, however, requires more water than typical vegetables or trees. Under the new water restrictions, dairy producers will have to choose to either cut supply and reduce their herd or increase input prices by buying feed from other states. Reducing herd size surely will impact wholesale and retail dairy prices as other producers will not be able to increase supply fast enough to meet consumer demand. Loss of market share for the CA dairy industry can have negative spillover effects on labor (farmers, farm workers) transportation, and other industries involved in getting dairy products to the consumer. These same implications can be discussed for the meat industry and wine industry in California.

Although a limited irrigation scenario causes producers to incur losses and requires strict enforcement to be successful, I do believe this policy to be least costly in the short run. This policy, however, will not reduce groundwater consumption over time. Water saved today will be used down the road, exhausting the resource. An alternative policy should be considered that could have more effective long-run implications.

The Pyramid of Raqqa and the Free Market

"If Isis’s “caliphate” were a state, it would be a country of the poor. Most Syrians in the territory are struggling to get by on about $115 a month"

What must a terrorist organization do to be considered too violent for Al-Quaeda? Abu Al-Baghdadi, the BA, MA and PHD (all in Islamic Studies) holding, self-proclaimed Caliph of the ISIL in Raqqa found a way.

In doing so, he made his capital Al-Raqqa. Raqqa presents a unique case to show just how effective economic policy is. 

Once resting in a profitable spot between Iraq and Syria, it is now sustained by the people whom the ISIL fight. In retrospect, Al-Assad's guiding hand was cold, but competent. Since sustaining the switch from Assad to Baghdadi, the residents must hold three currencies. General utilities running for a few hours is more of a desire than a daily expectation, because the ISIL guard state-built facilities while government workers sustain the city. Government workers are paid by the Syrian (Damascus) and Iraqi government. In fact, the most integral workers in Raqqa, as well as the basal utilities integral to running a tiny city (much less a state), are all paid for, built and/or hired by the Syrian or Iraqi governing bodies. Come pay day, they gather three types of currency and make the trek to Damascus or Baghdad. While life has become more difficult, it has remained similar enough that the ISIL public policy can be analyzed. 

Thus, there are fairly stringent economic policies, and some have interesting implications. Take, for example, the above figure of $115 a month for the average Syrian (Raqqans are ostensibly poorer) and now deduct that by 50%. That $57.50 goes to the ISIL for protection money, though the organization in Syria reaps $1m/day via extortion and gas money. The ISIL takes all petroleum and oil in exchange for promises not to kill employees nor destroy utility buildings. The first medical university of Raqqa opened because the ISIL killed every doctor that helped Shia soldiers. This is basically a Labor supply ceiling that combines a floor of free aid sent by humanitarian groups. 

The tax line can almost be seen as economic re-distribution if one looks at the soldiers - standing uselessly at gates, checking passports, taking money and whatnot - as the furthest left tail of the distribution. It leads to traders and entrepreneurs, even with a 2.5% revenue tax and a 10% tax on exporting cargo (might as well sell it in Raqqa), being tentative to engage in business with the ISIL. Most interesting is that when there are no militants around to watch, the prices of fuel to bread - set by the state - reach exorbitant levels due to severe supply limits. With labor and commodity supply limits, it is interesting to note how the people constrained by the quasi-limited economy still engage in free market principles, even when faced with deadly repercussions. In fact, farmers bereft of real farming equipment, when offered subsidized farming necessities for food purchasing rights by the soon-to-be starving ISIL, refused to engage in private transactions with the ISIL on the grounds of selling the food in strongholds like Raqqa at free market prices (which are also substituted for barter-economies). 

Baghdadi is taking the "social welfare" and dividing it/moving it to the "dead weight loss (to welfare)" triangle in that what should be social welfare has been driven as far down (aka price point near the top) as possible to leverage the entire triangle to be given to the ISIL in some form or another. In macromarket terms, the civilians are resisting by choosing, in the face of a Caliphate once again, to eschew monarchism for democratic foundations.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b2c6b5ca-9427-11e4-82c7-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3WCy6po3E 

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/webtv/reports/2014/03/04/Food-prices-skyrocket-in-Syria-s-Raqqah.html