Science Essay 社会学 管理类作业经济学作业 法律作业 市场学作业 语言学文学 金融作业 会计作业 国际商务管理 MBA Essay fashion&culture 物流管理作业

页岩气和致密油的经济影响 Economic Impact of Shale Gas and Tight Oil

时间:2018-02-16 22:15来源 作者:英国论文网 点击联系客服: 客服:Damien
从非常规来源提取页岩气和致密油目前正在进行激烈的辩论。关于利益和劣势的讨论在区域、国家和国际一级的经济政策中处于决定性的起点。欧洲在这个问题上仍然分歧,而来自美国的数据似乎很有希望。然而,关于页岩气繁荣的宏观经济影响的问题仍然不清楚。提交人称,美国和欧洲的长期经济利益相当有限。为了证明这一点,他将批判地分析Daniel Yergin和Nick Butler的文章。
Why the Economic Impact of Shale Gas and Tight Oil is rather limited
The extraction of shale gas and tight oil from unconventional sources is currently subject to a fierce debate. The discussion about benefits and disadvantages stands at a decisive threshold for economic policies at a regional, national and international level. Europe remains divided on this issue while data from the US seems to be promising. The question on the macroeconomic impact of the shale gas boom remains, however, unclear. The author claims that the long-run economic benefits for the US and Europe are rather limited. To prove this, he will critically analyse the claims made by Daniel Yergin and Nick Butler as well as Muehlenbachs, Spiller & Timmins article on the subject.
The focus of the analysis at a glance 重点分析
Daniel Yergin claims in his article, that US shale gas and tight oil have already changed global energy markets and reduced both Europe’s competitiveness vis-à-vis the US and China’s overall competitiveness. What is more, he claims that this “unconventional revolution” in energy will bring a shift in global politics. Although it is probable, that the US will developed to be gas exporting country in the coming years, studies show that they will have to rely significantly on crude oil imports in the future, and not only from Canada, as Yergin claims.
Furthermore, there will not be a significant reduction on emissions due to the so called shale revolution. Other local externalities, such as the impact on groundwater, air pollution, and leakages have to be considered. Muehlenbachs, Spiller & Timmins article even suggests considerable effects on the housing-market and property values. Furthermore, data of the US case shows that the reduction of the amount of coal-produced energy was triggered by the cyclical decrease in gas prices, which has now largely turned. Shale gas is insufficient on its own to drive out coal of the overall energy-mix in both the United States and Europe. Therefore, Nick Butler’s claim of self-sufficiency within a few years and Yergin’s statement about a shift in world politics have to be treated with caution.
Yergin and Butler both come up with the argument, that lower gas prices will strengthen the economy. When looking at the impact of lower gas prices on productivity, two effects can be analysed: Firstly, an income effect due to the fact that gas can now be produced cheaper and thus, ceteris paribus, more income is available to buy other goods. Secondly, substitution effects that are resulting from shifting gas prices that can change the relative prices of goods in which gas is an input and consequently have knock-on effects for productivity in other sectors. Yet, it is not that simple. Analysing the issue out of a microeconomic perspective suggests that the effect on GDP of the two effects is likely to be trivially unimportant, affecting sectors representing only a minor part of the economy (1.2% in the US). Data of several studies suggests average income effects of about 0.575% from 2012 and 2040 for the US. It is important to stress that this is a long-term increase in the level of GDP, not the growth rate.(责任编辑:cinq)

UK Thesis Base Contacts