Resource Economics at Towson

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Local food

This is old news, but a nice piece by Steve Sexton on Freakonomics address the problems with local food. Again, it's not that it's wrong to grow your own food or eat what's produced by the farm down the street: it's the locavore's insistence on consuming local as much as possible that can get to be a problem. Maybe you disagree, but at least read the article to see what this guy's thinking.

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Perspectives on the Proposed Bottle Bill in Maryland

Bottles litter the streets, clog stormwater drains, and pile up in the Inner Harbor and the Bay at large. Baltimore alone spends roughly $10million a year to clean up litter and implement control measures. Overall, Maryland is estimated to recycle only 22 percent of about 4 billion beverage containers sold annually. This compares poorly to the national recycling rate of 35 percent. Maryland House Delegate Maggie McIntosh has sponsored a bill titled “Recycle for Real” which would attempt to remedy the situation by instituting a 5 cent refundable deposit on drink containers. In other states that have a 5 cent refundable deposit, recycling rates go up to around 75 percent.

Strong opposition to the legislation comes from beverage distributors and merchants, who claim that it would jeopardize sales and employment. Since interstate competition would keep beverage prices from rising, the consumer would not incur the cost of the deposit, rather the cost would be shifted to beverage companies. Other arguments against the proposed bill claim that the bill will take away from recycling programs run by municipalities who offer single-stream curbsidepick-up and drop-off locations.

Proponents of the bottle bill argue that it would “reduce litter, create jobs, and that its costs are manageable” since the unclaimed deposits would be returned to redemption centers in the form of 3 cent handling fees.

If recycling rates were to increase as dramatically as in other states, the environmental benefits seem clear. However, it is unclear how the shift in recycling patterns would affect existing recycling programs. Would recycling streams from curbside pickups and drop-off centers simply be funneled toward bottle deposit returns? Or would the refundable deposit attract a new stream of recycling, perhaps from lower income earners for whom the refund would be worth the effort to recycle? Ironically, the deposit program operates best with a margin of unreturned bottles, since this unclaimed portion generates revenue to fund the program. Perhaps the combination of recycling programs would allow some of the bottle deposits to be refunded to those willing to put forth the effort of reclamation, while those who would rather forgo the refund and the effort could take advantage of the more convenient single-stream curbside pickup programs.

--Daniela Beall

**For a more detailed analysis of the impacts:

University of Maryland Environmental Finance Center. (2011, Dec 15). 2011 Impact analysis of a beverage container deposit program in Maryland. Retrieved from http://www.abell.org/pubsitems/CD-Deposit_Program_Analysis-312.pdf

Thursday, April 4, 2013

Tangier Island

Tangier Island, Virginia is home to a community of about 470 people. The close-knit community lives a simple life but the island faces the problem of major erosion caused by rising sea level. The effects of storms are becoming more severe as the sea level increases which is causing the entrance to the Western side of Tangier Island to widen. The widening exposes the island to bigger waves. The community is willing to try anything to slow the loss of their home land. They are currently implementing experimental buoys previously tested in labs of the U. S. Naval Academy. The innovative buoys have projecting fins and are larger than a person. The goal of the buoys is to reduce the wave's energy by slowing them down. Also underway are plans to build stone jetties beside Tangier Island. The state and federal government plan to spend $4.1 million on the jetty. Tangier Island is just one of many places under threat. As the pace of sea level rising accelerates, concern for future generations increases. According to studies, reducing carbon dioxide emissions will help slow the rate at which it rises but not stop it completely. If emissions continue at the rate they are going, sea level will increase 2 to 5 feet by 2100. If emissions are greatly cut, sea level is estimated to still increase 1 to 3.5 feet by 2100. Regardless, people are going to have to adapt to the increase in sea level. Cutting emissions will decrease the acceleration and buy time for adaptations for future generations.

As I was reading the articles I thought to myself, are there enough benefits to support continued costs of saving Tangier Island? There are about 500 people that could be saved by the installation of buoys and the jetty but these are not permanent solutions. Innovation like the jetty for instance, may not be effective once the sea level breaches a certain point. New costly innovations will need to be implemented in the future. The root of the problem is carbon emissions. I think the government should invest money into this which will not only help Tangier Island but many other people at risk from sea level increase.

Discussion Question: Do you think the government should spend money on innovations to combat the impacts of increasing water levels or should the government focus money on decreasing emissions?

--Kim Maier

Wednesday, April 3, 2013

Market affects CSAs

Non-quizzable contribution from Kim:

While doing some research about urban farming in Baltimore City for another class I stumbled across some information relevant to topics we've learning in class.

"We remain committed to providing wholesome, local meat to our community and will do all in our power to keeps costs low and affordable. Feeder pigs have almost doubled in cost from 3 years ago. Pig feed, which is primarily corn and soybeans, has increased again. For those who are interested, corn was $2.50/bushel just 4-5 years ago. Because of corn use in ethanol and the droughts last year and this year, corn has shot to $9/bushel and is expected to go into the teens by the end of 2012. While our beef and lamb is grass fed, the price of cattle and sheep is set by the market, which in the US is based primarily on grain fed animals. Further price pressure comes from the supply side. The US beef herd is at its lowest level since 1957, about half of what it was just a few years ago. " http://www.genuinefoodmd.com/CSA.html