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
2018-10-16
57
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.
Coal industry and nuclear industry have both served as interest groups that determine policy in history.
选项
答案
I
解析
根据coal industry和nuclear industry两个关键词锁定I段。I段第3句讲,不是那些具有理性经济思维并服务于公众利益的公务员而是那些利益群体在做决策,第4句讲在30年前,是煤炭行业和核能行业在决策。可见,本题句子是I段第3句和第4句的概括总结。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/gfH7777K
0
大学英语六级
相关试题推荐
Anybrainexerciseisbetterthanbeingatotalmentalcouchpotato.Buttheactivitieswiththemost【C1】______arethosethatr
Peoplecannowavoidhavingtosortthroughalbumsfromseveraldifferentfriendswhentryingtoreliveparties,weddingsandot
A、Improvementsofchildren’sachievementsinschoolcanbemade.B、Children’sheathcanbeimproved.C、Theschoolneedstocare
WhyIBecameaTeacher:toPassonMyLoveofLiteratureA)Likelotsofpeople,IneverthoughtI’dbeateacherwhenIwasats
NewDiscoveriesofPublicTransportA)AnewstudyconductedfortheWorldBankbyMurdochUniversity’sInstituteforScienceand
A、Encouragement.B、Agreement.C、Apause.D、Aninterruption.D推断题。文章主要介绍了西方人的交流,无论赞同还是反对,主要是观点的交流,由此可知他们交流时最可能发生的是打断对方的发言,即interr
Nearlytwo-thirdsofbusinessesintheUKwantto【C1】______staffwithforeignlanguageskills.Frenchisstillthemosthighlyp
AnimalsontheMoveA)Itlookedlikeascenefrom"Jaws"butwithoutthedramaticmusic.Ahugesharkwasslowlyswimmingthrou
A、Best-sellingFemaleArtist.B、QueenofPop.C、MTVVideoMusicAwards.D、TheStarofHollywood.C
Sowe’vealreadytalkedabitaboutthe【B1】______ofextremesportslikerock-climbing.Aspsychologists,weneedtoaskourselve
随机试题
下列哪一项不属于计划的功能()
患者男,6岁。自幼皮肤黏膜有出血症状,血小板计数120×l09/L,血涂片可见血小板散在分布,出血时间,ADP、胶原和花生四烯酸诱导的血小板聚集减低和不聚集,加瑞斯托霉素引起的聚集减低。该患者正确的诊断是
MR图像质量指标不包括
某建筑公司兼营运输业务,2018年发生的业务如下:(1)与甲建筑公司签订一项建筑承包合同,金额3500万元,又将该工程的一部分分包给乙建筑公司签订合同,分包金额1000万元。(2)3月31日,与丙企业签订一协议,公司承租丙企业设备1台,每月租赁费1
客户的信贷需求和信贷动机是银行的()。
2018年7月1日,A、B两公司签订了一份价值100万元的货物买卖合同。合同约定:A公司于2018年7月15日向B公司交付全部货物,交付地点为B公司仓库;B公司在验货合格后10日内一次性支付全部货款;任何一方如违约,应向守约方支付违约金10万元。合同订立后
一旦领导企业扭亏行动的cEO们建立起便于大家精诚合作的组织结构,他们就需要对员工授权,________。公司领导层应该传达出这样的信息:他们现在期望员工表现出主动性。填人横线处最恰当的一项是()。
Baliisanislandbelongingto______.HowdidthepeopleofBalipreventfightingfrombreakingout?
A、Hedroveoutoftiletownandtriedtoescape.B、Hewentdirectlytothepolicestation.C、Hearguedwiththepoliceangrily.
Manisalandanimal,butheisalsocloselytiedtothesea.【B1】______historytheseahassurvivedtheneedsofman.Theseaha
最新回复
(
0
)