The Hazelton coal-processing

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
Thanked: 215 times
Followed by:7 members

The Hazelton coal-processing

by kvcpk » Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:20 am
The Hazelton coal-processing plant is a major employer in the Hazelton area, but national environmental regulations will force it to close if it continues to use old, polluting processing methods. However, to update the plant to use newer, cleaner methods would be so expensive that the plant will close unless it receives the tax break it has requested. In order to prevent a major increase in local unemployment, the Hazelton government is considering granting the plant's request.

Which of the following would be most important for the Hazelton government to determine before deciding whether to grant the plant's request?

(A) Whether the company that owns the plant would open a new plant in another area if the present plant were closed
(B) Whether the plant would employ far fewer workers when updated than it does now
(C) Whether the level of pollutants presently being emitted by the plant is high enough to constitute a health hazard for local residents
(D) Whether the majority of the coal processed by the plant is sold outside the Hazelton area
(E) Whether the plant would be able to process more coal when updated than it does now

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:31 am
IMO B.

The govt plan to give tax break only to increase employment.then the govt have to decide whether it continue employ same number of people after updating.

If updated method is used that leads to employing few workers than before,then unemployment will increase.
Then there is no valid reason for govt to give the tax break.
Last edited by selango on Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
Thanked: 215 times
Followed by:7 members

by kvcpk » Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:34 am
what is wrong with option C?

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:40 am
The plant is closed because it uses the older polluting method.If the govt plan to give to tax break, then surely the new cleaner method will be used.So the pollution problem will not arises.

Also government need not to evaluate Option C again,bcoz due to pollution reasons only the plant is closed.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
Thanked: 215 times
Followed by:7 members

by kvcpk » Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:51 am
Though option B looks a better choice, I see nothing wrong with option C. Why shouldnt the govt check if the level of pollutants presently being emitted by the plant is high enough to constitute a health hazard for local residents ?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 1:05 am
Thanked: 11 times

by jube » Fri Jun 25, 2010 6:00 am
Hazelton govt. is considering granting the plant's request to prevent a major increase in local unemployment. Point C is totally irrelevant for this.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:50 am
The conclusion is based on govt decision to increase employment.So govt needs to evaluate the situation regarding employment.

Option C deals with pollution level that does not any effect on Employment.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
Thanked: 215 times
Followed by:7 members

by kvcpk » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:19 pm
jube wrote:Hazelton govt. is considering granting the plant's request to prevent a major increase in local unemployment. Point C is totally irrelevant for this.
This makes sense.. Thanks Jube..