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
2019-09-18
53
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.
Electricity could be half as cheap if there were no government intervention.
选项
答案
M
解析
根据electricity、government intervention锁定M段。M段倒数第2句讲到没有政府干预,电能会便宜50%。题目的half与原文的50%对应,其他信息均一致。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/7kW7777K
0
大学英语六级
相关试题推荐
BackinthecarefreedaysoftheNoughtiesboom,Britain’syoungstersweresweptalongbythebuy-now-pay-latercultureembraced
Forthispart,youareallowed30minutestowriteanessayonprotectionofintangibleculturalheritage.Youressayshouldfoc
A、MIT.B、ReedCollege.C、Harvard.D、Yale.A
A、Theusers’commentonmedicineisnotalwaysreliable.B、Adsofover-the-counterproductsarenotallowed.C、Theclaimofany
Peoplecannowavoidhavingtosortthroughalbumsfromseveraldifferentfriendswhentryingtoreliveparties,weddingsandot
Atattoomaygiveparentsofchildrenwithfoodallergiessomepeaceofmindwhentheysendtheirkidsofftoschool.Yes,atat
FiveMythsaboutCollegeDebt[A]Thetrillion-dollarstudentdebtburdenhascausedmanydebatesaboutthevalueofcollege.
A、TheOpenUniversity.B、TheYoungFoundation.C、TheBritishgovernment.D、TheSchoolofEverything.B该题问新型学校的想法来自哪里,录音开头说到这个想法源
A、Satisfied.B、Enthusiastic.C、Disappointed.D、Indifferent.C女士谈到,男士一定见证了公司很多的变化,男士回应说绝大部分的变化都是使事情变得更加糟糕。故选C。
A、Governmentmaystopitasabnormalcompetition.B、Writerswon’talwaysbehappytogainexposure.C、Thewebsitesdonotmakep
随机试题
我国多党合作的首要前提和根本保证是()
一商家销售某种商品,其价格函数为P(x)=7-0.2x,其中x为销售量(千克),商品的成本函数是C(x)=3x+1(百元).若每销售一千克商品,政府要征税t(百元),求商家获得最大利润时的销售量?
既能止咳化痰,又能润肠通便的药物是()
G1P0,孕33周,因先兆早产入院,抑制宫缩治疗已一周,子宫仍敏感,曾肌注地塞米松,治疗两天,今做NST检查,为无反应型,首选的方案为
婴儿开始添加淀粉类食物的月龄是
结构化面试提纲的设计,实际上是结构化面试过程中所要提问的问题的设计,它的主要依据是()。
协调机制伴随着政府权力运行的每一个环节和层次,协调机制的目的是不断调整政府与市场、社会的关系,实现社会资源的优化配置、公共事务的良好治理,增强政府系统对外界环境的敏感性与回应性,提高政府权力运行的合法性与有效性。下列属于政府系统与外部环境系统协调方法的是(
A.上颌前部片B.下颌横断片C.上颌后部片D.华特位片E.铁氏位片常用于检查下颌骨体部骨质有无颊、舌侧膨胀,可显示下颌体和牙弓横断面影像的X线平片是()。
最近的一项研究发现,每天喝两杯以上咖啡的从事久坐工作的中年男子比其他从事久坐工作的中年男子更可能血液胆固醇含量高,而胆固醇是患心脏病可能性增加的一个因素。胆同醇能够由饮食进入血液,但咖啡中不含该物。下面哪项如果正确,能最严重地削弱该研究的一个结论:咖啡增加
Overthepast30years,thechildhoodobesityrateintheUnitedStateshasdoubledforchildrenandtripledforadolescents.Si
最新回复
(
0
)