I Creating a formula for the cost of pollution through time

grafs50
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Apologies if this is in the wrong section. Wasn't sure where to put it. While this is technically homework, I don't think it fits in the homework section

In a paper I'm writing, I need to estimate the cost to society of future pollution. Reading relevant academic articles, it seems pretty clear that estimating this is basically impossible. I think I've come up with a method to base a reasonable approximation (at least reasonable enough for the paper) given two things: knowing the current level of pollution and the level of pollution at which humanity is likely to die out.

I set the cost of pollution, C(P), where humanity goes extent to infinite (i.e.: no polluting activity is worth extinction)

Then I tried to come up with a formula that would make C(P)=0 when P=0 and C(P)=(1/0) when pollution reached extinction levels. This is what I came up with:

aP/(a-P) where a is the level of pollution at which humanity goes extinct. I'm also assuming that the costs of pollution grow exponentially.

The intuition I'd like to assign to this equation is that, as the level of pollution grows its effects grow linearly (the numerator, and it also begins to effect more and more of the planet.

What's right and what's wrong about this approach?
Thanks in advance.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You still have the problem of determining what extinction levels are and a way of measuring pollution as a single scalar value that ranges up to that extinction value.

The approach only considers one cost of pollution, the closeness with which it approaches "extinction levels". It does not consider how much more we have to spend for clean drinking water, breathable air, decreased productivity due to shortened lifespans, development costs to replace submerged real estate, increased medical costs due to pollution-related effects or decreased medical costs due to pollution-related early demise. All of the things that could make the result meaningful to use and difficult to determine.

The approach also does not have a scale in dollars (or Euros or anything else). How can someone make a rational management decision about the wisdom of paying 1 billion dollars and 12 lives for a pollution cost reduction of .001?
 
If the cost of pollution grows exponentially you must have that ##\frac{d}{dP}C(P)=KC(P)## where ##K## is a constant ... (is the Maltus law)
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top