It is difficult to control white pollution by mark

2022-08-12
  • Detail

In the first year of the new century, the China Consumer Association announced that it would carry out the theme activity of the year of "green consumption" nationwide. The core of green consumption is to guide consumers to change their consumption concepts, advocate nature and pursue health. While pursuing the needs of life, we should pay attention to environmental protection, save resources and energy, and achieve sustainable development

eliminating disposable foamed plastic tableware and promoting green products are major measures to control "white pollution" and protect the environment. Some people say that whether elimination and substitution can work depends on the market. The author believes that from the perspective of economics, ecological construction and environmental protection, like infrastructure, cannot rely solely on market regulation, and cannot apply eliminated harmful products and substituted beneficial products to general market competitive industries. "Banning white goods" and "promoting green goods" cannot be completed solely by market competition, let alone price as a lever to choose, but what is needed is government behavior, coercive means, and policy preferences, Otherwise, it must be forbidden and difficult to enter

the so-called price advantage is still a shield for foamed plastic tableware to occupy the market, and it is accused that tableware such as pulp molding is too expensive for consumers to bear, so it is difficult to enter the market. This kind of price theory itself defines the environmental protection industry as a general competitive industry, allowing its market to spontaneously adjust the superior and the inferior. If it is used in a cascade way, it can be used and eliminated normally. This understanding is one-sided and unfair. It is a fact to say that the price of catering utensils such as pulp molding is higher than that of foamed plastic products, and it is unrealistic to say that consumers can't bear it. Tableware, as a kind of consumer add-on product, its choice is not in the consumers themselves. In real life, we have never seen the catering industry prepare more than two kinds of tableware for consumers to choose, and consumers are very passive in using tableware to a certain extent. Now the people who shout that consumers can't bear it are not the consumers themselves, but the producers and product operators of foaming tableware, especially the second dealers and fast-food owners in the circulation link. In order to make more profits, they criticized the green tableware, so as to delay the survival time of the eliminated products

as we all know, the price is composed of many factors, one of which is the production cost. As a new light transmission and heat insulation material, the use of aerogel in building energy-saving glass has attracted more and more attention. The cost of products with different materials, different processes, different technical content, different environmental protection benefits and economic benefits is certainly different. Why should the price of foamed tableware be determined based on the annual growth rate of about 20% for four consecutive years? Why do we have to compare a beneficial product with a harmful one? Why do we have to compare a replacement that should be eliminated with a new one? To say the least, even if it is market regulation, competition is unfair. According to this price, those that should be eliminated cannot be eliminated, and those that should be replaced cannot be replaced. "White pollution" has no choice but to pollute. From the perspective of sustainable development, when we consider costs, it is important to include environmental and resource costs in the calculation of production costs, and we must pay attention to social costs. Such examples are not uncommon. For example, the small paper mill that was shut down only discharged pollutants but did not treat them, and the production cost was low. Although it had market competitiveness in price, it was also shut down because it was harmful to society. The disposal of foamed plastic tableware waste alone is about 10 times its own production price. Producers "take away profits and leave behind pollution", and transfer the cost of treating "white pollution" to society. This kind of cost externalization behavior increases the burden of the government and society, and pollutes the environment. This big account is often ignored to avoid personnel mistakes. If the producers bear the "white pollution" brought by foamed plastic tableware, the price of its finished products will be several times higher than that of the current line, I'm afraid its competitiveness in the market will not be very strong

at this stage of high development of market economy, some products use the market and price lever to adjust their proportion in social life, which is a sign of social progress. However, market regulation is not omnipotent. The treatment of "white pollution" cannot rely on market regulation alone, but should use a variety of methods to completely eliminate pollution

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI