首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Do Britain’s Energy Firms Serve the Public Interest? [A]Capitalism is the best and worst of systems. Left to itself, it will emb
Do Britain’s Energy Firms Serve the Public Interest? [A]Capitalism is the best and worst of systems. Left to itself, it will emb
admin
2016-12-18
120
问题
Do Britain’s Energy Firms Serve the Public Interest?
[A]Capitalism is the best and worst of systems. Left to itself, it will embrace the new and uncompromisingly follow the logic of prices and profit, a revolutionary accelerator for necessary change. But it can only ever react to today’s prices, which cannot capture what will happen tomorrow. So, left to itself, capitalism will neglect both the future and the cohesion of the society in which it trades.
[B]What we know, especially after the financial crisis of 2008, is that we can’t leave capitalism to itself. If we want it to work at its best, combining its doctrines with public and social objectives, there is no alternative but to design the markets in which it operates. We also need to try to add in wider obligations than the simple pursuit of economic logic. Otherwise, there lies disaster.
[C]If this is now obvious in banking, it has just become so in energy. Since 2004, consumers’ energy bills have nearly tripled, far more than the rise in energy prices. The energy companies demand returns nearly double those in mass retailing. This would be problematic at any time, but when wages in real terms have fallen by some 10% in five years it constitutes a crisis. John Major, pointing to the mass of citizens who now face a choice between eating or being warm—as he made the case for a high profits tax on energy companies—drove home the social reality. The energy market, as it currently operates, is maladaptive and illegitimate. There has to be changed.
[D]The design of this market is now universally recognised as wrong, universally, that is, excepting the regulator and the government. The energy companies are able to disguise their cost structures because there is no general pool into which they are required to sell their energy—instead opaquely striking complex internal deals between their generating and supply arms. Yet this is an industry where production and consumption is 24/7 and whose production logic requires such energy pooling. The sector has informally agreed, without regulatory challenge, that it should seek a supply margin of 5%—twice that of retailing.
[E]On top the industry also requires long-term price guarantees for investment in renewables and nuclear without any comparable return in lowering its target cost of capital. The national grid, similarly privately owned, balances its profit maximising aims with a need to ensure security of supply. And every commitment to decarbonise British energy supply by 2030 is passed on to the consumer, rich and poor alike, whatever their capacity to pay. It will also lead to negligible new investment unless backed by government guarantees and subsidies. It could scarcely be worse—and with so much energy capacity closing in the next two years constitutes a first-order national crisis.
[F]The general direction of reform is clear. Energy companies should be required to sell their electricity into a pool whose price would become the base price for retail. This would remove the ability to mask the relationship between costs and prices: retail prices would fall as well as rise clearly and unambiguously as pool prices changed.
[G]The grid, which delivers electricity and gas into our homes and is the guarantor that the lights won’t go out, must be in public ownership, as is Network Rail in the rail industry. It should also be connected to a pan-European grid for additional security. Green commitments, or decisions to support developing renewables, should be paid out of general taxation to take the poll tax element out of energy bills, with the rich paying more than the poor for the public good. Because returns on investment take decades in the energy industry, despite what free market fundamentalists argue, the state has to assume financial responsibility of energy investment as it is doing with nuclear and renewables.
[H]The British energy industry has gone from nationalisation to privatisation and back to government control in the space of 25 years. Although the energy industry is nominally in private hands, we have exactly the same approach of government picking winners and dictating investment plans that was followed with disastrous consequences from the Second World War to the mid 1980s. In the 1970s and early 1980s, the consumer got unfair treatment because long-term investment plans and contracts promoted by the government required electricity companies to use expensive local coal.
[I]The energy industry is, once again, controlled by the state. The same underlying drivers dictate policy in the new world of state control. It is not rational economic thinking and public-interested civil servants that determine policy, but interest groups. Going back 30 years, it was the coal industry—both management and unions—and the nuclear industry that dictated policy. Tony Benn said he had "never known such a well-organised scientific, industrial and technical lobby". Today, it is green pressure groups, EU parliamentarians and commissioners and, often, the energy industry itself that are loading burdens on to consumers. When the state controls the energy industry, whether through the back or the front door, it is vested interests(既得利益)that get their way and the consumer who pays.
[J]So how did we get to where we are today? In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the industry was entirely privatised. It was recognised that there were natural monopoly elements and so prices in these areas were regulated. At the same time, the regulator was given a duty to promote competition. From 1998, all domestic energy consumers could switch supplier for the first time and then wholesale markets were liberalised, allowing energy companies to source the cheapest forms of energy. Arguably, this was the high water mark of the liberalisation of the industry.
[K]Privatisation was a great success. Instead of investment policy being dictated by the impulses of government and interest groups, it became dictated by long-term commercial considerations. Sadly, the era of liberalised markets, rising efficiency and lower bills did not last long. Both the recent Labour governments and the coalition have pursued similar policies of intervention after intervention to send the energy industry almost back to where it started.
[L]One issue that unites left and many on the paternalist right is that of energy security. We certainly need government intervention to keep the lights on and ensure that we are not over-dependent on energy from unstable countries. But it should also be noted that there is nothing more insecure than energy arising from a policy determined by vested interests without any concern for commercial considerations. Energy security will not be achieved by requiring energy companies to invest in expensive sources of supply and by making past investments redundant through regulation. It will also not be achieved by making the investment environment even more uncertain. Several companies all seeking the cheapest supplies from diverse sources will best serve the interests of energy security.
[M]The UK once had an inefficient and expensive energy industry. After privatisation, costs fell as the industry served the consumer rather than the mining unions and pro-nuclear interests. Today, after a decade or more of increasing state control, we have an industry that serves vested interests rather than the consumer interest once again. Electricity prices before taxes are now 15% higher than the average of major developed nations. Electricity could be around 50% cheaper without government interventions. We must liberalise again and not complete the circle by returning to nationalisation.
The production logic of energy industry calls for an energy pooling which currently does not exist.
选项
答案
D
解析
根据关键词production logic和energy pooling锁定D段。D段第2句讲到能源公司之所以能够隐瞒其成本结构是因为目前没有一个总的能源汇集库(no general pool)来要求能源公司把能源卖到这里,而倒数第2句说能源行业的生产逻辑又需要(requires)这种能源联营。本题句子信息结合了这两句的内容。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/1RF7777K
0
大学英语六级
相关试题推荐
Betteraccesstohealthcaredatahelpslocalgovernmentsimprovepreventivehealthpoliciesaimedatreducingoverallmedicalc
AlmostathirdofallAmericansaretossingandturning,unabletogetagoodnight’ssleepbecausethey’reworryingaboutthee
A、Sheisimpatienttolearncomputerprogramming.B、Sheisunawareheroperationsystemisoutdated.C、Sheisunabletousethe
A、Improvecomputerprogramming.B、Explaincertainnaturalphenomena.C、Predictglobalpopulationgrowth.D、Promotenationalfina
食品安全问题是关系到千千万万人民群众切身利益的社会问题。可是在中国,重大食品安全事件频繁发生,食品安全问题日益严峻。某些没有诚信的商人为了追求利润最大化,不惜往人们每天食用的食品当中添加种类繁多的非法化学添加剂(additive),极大损害了人们的身体健康
中国人非常重视“吃”。“民以食为天”这句古老的俗语可谓众所周知。食物可口和营养丰富一直被当作日常生活的基本要素。中国的烹饪(cuisine)文化源远流长,始于商周朝,距今约3500年。中国现有的菜肴品种有11000种之多,烹调方法也有50多种。在漫长的发展
A、Becausehewaspraisedbytheprofessor.B、Becausehehasfoundagoodjob.C、Becausehehasgotachanceforaninterview.D、
A、Themanshouldlearnfromfamouspeople.B、Themanshouldbemorecarefulintheexperiment.C、Themanshouldbemorepatient
A、TitleNinemakesgirlsjoininsportsprograms.B、TitleNinehasagoodeffectonsports.C、TitleNineisveryeffectiveinhi
A、Tohelpthemgainindependence.B、Tohelpthemmakedecisions.C、Togiveadvicetothem.D、Toofferthemfoodandmoney.A事实细节
随机试题
A、药理学B、药动学C、药效学D、治疗学E、药剂学研究机体对药物如何处置过程的学科是
A.α受体B.β受体C.M受体D.N1受体E.N2受体导致心脏房室传导减慢的受体是
在类风湿关节炎中,最先受累的关节组织是
在我国当前的金融监管中,中国人民银行的职能为()。
初次发生的交易或事项采用新的会计政策属于会计政策变更,应采用追溯调整法进行处理。()
作为金融活动的载体,可以在金融市场上交易的是()。
2013年5月1日,在泰国访问的中国外交部长王毅在会见泰国总理英拉时表示,中泰关系具有特殊性、稳定性和_______三个显著特点。王毅表示,希望通过此次访问深化中泰睦邻友好与务实合作,让两国关系好上加好、亲上加亲,将中泰全面战略伙伴关系提高到新水平。
说感冒是“不治之症”,并不是说,患了感冒,一定会死,“不治”有两重含义,一是感冒无需专门的治疗,二是没有可以治愈感冒的药物。资料统计说,90%的感冒是病毒引起的,只有10%是由细菌感染引起的。细菌和病毒的区别在于:细菌有细胞,病毒没有细胞,只有核糖核酸,、
下列关于宪法与宪政的关系说法错误的是
Thiscompanyprovidesservicesforanybreakdownfreeofchargewithinoneyearofpurchase.Ifdamageresultsfromimproperuse
最新回复
(
0
)