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
2016-04-01
62
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.
Consumers, whether rich or poor, will pay for the decarbonisation commitments.
选项
答案
E
解析
根据decarbonisation commitments定位到E段。该段第3句讲到,截止到2030年前,让英国能源供应低碳化的每一个承诺都会转嫁到消费者身上,不论贫富或其购买力。题目中的pay for与原文pass onto对应,其他信息与原文一致。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/l8L7777K
0
大学英语六级
相关试题推荐
HowMarketersTargetKidsA)Kidsrepresentanimportantdemographictomarketersbecausetheyhavetheirownpurchasingpower,t
Asenseofselfdevelopsinyoungchildrenbydegrees.Theprocesscanusefullybethoughtofintermsofthegradualemergence
Moreandmoregadgetsseektoreplicatethesortsofthingsyourmotherusedtoneedleyouabout:gettingexercise,eatingmore
Onequestionthatworriesmanyvisitorstodefensivecarry.com,awebsitedevotedtothedelightsanddifficultiesoflifewitha
Thisisatimeofgreatchangeintheworld—technological,economic,religious,political,business,andenvironmental.Theresu
TheConservativegovernmentwillfacedifficultyprovingthatitsplantoautomaticallyenrolleligibleCanadiansintheOldAge
WhenErikRobertson,anaccountexecutiveataSanFranciscopublicrelationsagency,meetswithconservativeclients,he’salw
Inthemarket’seyes,thelatestroundofconsumer-spendingnewswasgood.Itwassogoodthatthestockshadanotherbubblingd
A、Senseofduty.B、Self-confidence.C、Workefficiency.D、Passionforwork.B短文中提到,寻求建议者需要向其他人寻求建议才能在工作中获得安全感,也就是说他们在工作中缺乏自信心;而单独
A、Awell-knownsurgeon.B、Amotherofafour-year-old.C、AsingerborninTennessee.D、Acomputerprogrammer.C由短文中提到的…aprogram
随机试题
过多、过快或不均匀磨耗形成的病理状态是
甲氨蝶呤不具有哪项()。
香港甲公司与内地乙公司订立供货合同,约定由香港法院管辖。后双方因是否解除该合同及赔偿问题诉诸香港法院,法院判乙公司败诉。依相关规定。下列哪一选项是正确的?(2009年试卷一第39题)
某三层无筋砌体房屋(无吊车),现浇钢筋混凝土楼(屋)盖.刚性方案。墙体采用MU10级蒸压灰砂砖,M7.5级水泥砂浆砌筑。施工质量控制等级为B级。安全等级二级。各层砖柱截面均为370mm×490m,基础埋置较深且底层地面设置刚性地坪。房屋局部剖面示意如图3-
设立管理公开募集基金的基金管理公司,其注册资本不低于()亿元人民币,且必须为实缴货币资本。
根据企业对互联网络作用的认识及应用能力,Cisco公司的网络营销层次属于( )。网络营销的交易过程包括( )。
许多人很崇尚言论自由,以为言论自由就可以解决思想自由的问题。实际上,言论表达的自由并不必然走向思想自由。假如我们观察网络媒体上的有些表达,就会发现它存在着一种极端化的趋势,严谨的人不一定参与表达和讨论,同时网络媒体上有许多非理性的谩骂和恶意攻击等等。结果虽
根据以下资料回答下列问题。2005年底,全国城镇房屋建筑面积164.51亿平方米,其中住宅建筑面积107.69亿平方米,占房屋建筑面积的比重为65.46%。东部地区房屋建筑面积83.8亿平方米,中部地区45.22亿平方米,西部地区35.48亿平方米
(河南政法2010A—46)甲、乙两仓库存货吨数比为4:3,如果由甲库中取出8吨放到乙库中,则甲、乙两仓库存货吨数比为4:5。两仓库原存货总吨数是多少?()
A、Hevisiteditinperson.B、Helearnedfromafriendaboutit.C、Hereadofitinamagazine.D、Heknewthesculptor.C对话中男士说:“
最新回复
(
0
)