强“波特假说”存在产业异质性吗?——基于产业碳密集程度细分的视角

强"波特假说"认为严格而恰当的环境规制政策将使企业的生产效率呈现先降后升的趋势,为验证强"波特假说"及其产业异质性,首先建立产业碳密集指数,将工业部门36个细分行业划分为高碳密集产业、中碳密集产业和低碳密集产业;接着运用方向性距离函数测算2003—2014年细分行业的绿色全要素生产率,基于系统"GMM"估计方法验证三个细分行业的环境规制强度对绿色全要素生产率的影响。研究结果显示:第一,样本期间内,高碳密集产业的环境规制强度远远高于中低碳密集产业,这表明高碳密集产业一直是产业节能减排的重点对象,而碳排放情况较为严重的中碳密集产业则为"被遗忘的角落";第二,强"波特假说"在工业部门内存在产业异质性,高碳密集产业和中碳密集产业的环境规制强度与绿色全要素生产率呈"U"型关系,而在低碳密集产业中两者则呈倒"U"型关系;第三,相对于高碳密集产业,中碳密集产业因环境规制强度较容易跨越"U"型拐点而具有较大的减排空间,低碳密集产业在达到"U"型拐点之前,环境规制为其绿色全要素生产率提升的动力。本文研究结论蕴含如下的政策建议:根据产业的碳密集程度实施针对性的环境规制政策,持续加强中碳密集产业的环境规制力度,适度加强低碳密集产业的环境规制强度,高碳密集产业需根据不同阶段的经济水平设计具有针对性的环境规制政策,逐渐将三类产业的"遵循成本"效应转化为"创新补偿"效应,实现经济增长和环境保护的双赢。     

作业机废气减排技术研究

柴油发动机尾气排放中含有比汽油发动机更多的颗粒污染物。文章叙述了尾气净化装置反应原理,触媒及化学稳定性,柴油氧化催化剂和颗粒催化过滤器优点。通过外部加装尾气净化装置,解决了尾气污染问题,具有较好的发展前景、较强的实用性和可操作性。     

浅谈高校办公室工作的基本规律与工作技巧

从明晰高校办公室工作职责、高校办公室主任应具备的能力、创新高校办公室管理模式三个方面,阐述了高校办公室工作的基本规律。通过在高校办公室多年的工作积累,总结出了高校办公室主任八方面的工作技巧。     

唐山排污权交易模式浅析

对开展排污权交易的目的、意义、关键因素进行了分析,对唐山排污权交易的工作进程以及交易指标、交易主体、交易程序、指导价格、申购数量、交易范围、优先及限制条件等模式特点进行了阐述,以期为同类型城市开展排污权交易提供参考。     

天堂河河道治理工程水质改善预测分析

河道治理工程重在改善河道的水质,以恢复河流生态系统。本文以北京市大兴区天堂河河道治理工程为例,介绍了河道治理工程环境影响评价中的水质改善预测分析,首先分析生态需水量和供氧量是否满足河流生态需水要求,后又利用地面水环评助手软件预测了河流水质,预测分析了天堂河水质目标的可达性,旨在为以后的河道治理类工程环境影响评价提供参考。     

克拉玛依市核技术应用单位安全监管中应注意的几个问题

克拉玛依市的核技术应用逐渐增多,带给人们在工作、生活等方面快捷和高效的同时,随之也带来了潜在的辐射安全隐患,辐射风险由此增加。本文探讨了在辐射环境管理中监管执法面临的实际问题和解决问题的思路。强调了监管的重要性。     

ECONOMIC POLICIES FOR REGULATING AGRICULTURAL DRAINAGE WATER1

ABSTRACT: Agricultural drainage water is a major source of environmental pollution in many areas. This paper reviews the literature on the economics of nonpoint-source pollution and applies it to the regulation of agricultural drainage water. Four types of regulatory policies are considered. The empirical analysis is carried out for cotton production in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Variable inputs are the quantity of water applied and the type of irrigation system. All four policies can achieve economic efficiency under the conditions assumed here, but the policies differ in terms of the distributional impacts and administrative requirements.     

采场通风方式与瓦斯运移规律研究

采场是煤矿生产的核心地带,而采场通风系统是确保采场作业安全,创造良好生产环境的重要环节。本文以采场风流流动及瓦斯运移理论为基础,通过现场试验、模型模拟试验及计算机模拟研究等方法,着重研究了中国常用的和有发展前途的走向长壁后退式U型通风方式、U+L型通曲方式、后退式Y型通风方式条件下采场风流流动及瓦斯运移规律。     

THE REGULATED RIPARIAN VERSION OF THE ASCE MODEL WATER CODE: THE THIRD WAY TO ALLOCATE WATER1

ABSTRACT: Lawyers, engineers, and hydrologists are accustomed to thinking of water law as falling into one of two incompatible models: riparian rights (under which water is allocated by courts according to the relative reasonableness of the competing uses) and appropriative rights (under which water is allocated according to the temporal priority of the competing uses, largely by the action of the water users themselves but perfected by the issuance of an administrative permit). Usually unnoticed is the existence of a third approach, which I have dubbed “regulated riparianism.” Under regulated riparianism, water is allocated by water permits issued after an administrative determination of the reasonableness of the proposed use before the use is commenced. This system, now in place in about half of the states east of Kansas City (plus Hawaii), thus is fundamentally different from either the traditional ripanan rights that it replaces or the appropriative rights found in western states.     

Regulatory context for cumulative impact research

Wetlands protection has become a topic of increased public attention and support, and regulation of wetlands loss under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act has received high priority within the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Despite this, the nation is continuing to experience serious wetlands losses. This situation reflects the contentious nature of wetlands protection; it involves fundamental conflicts between environmental and development interests. Better information is needed to support regulatory decision making, including information on cumulative impacts. Currently, consideration of cumulative impacts, although required by various federal regulations, is limited. One reason is that most regulatory decisions are made on a permit-specific, site-specific basis, whereas cumulative impacts must be assessed on a broader, regional scale. In addition, scientific information and methods necessary to support cumulative impact assessment have been lacking. An anticipatory, planning-oriented framework to complement the existing site-specific permit review program is needed to support more effective consideration of cumulative impacts; such an effort is beginning to emerge. In addition, EPA is supporting research to provide better information on cumulative effects. It is recommended that the EPA program place initial emphasis on synthesis and analysis of existing information, on maximizing its use in decision making, and on information transfer. Recommended approaches include correlation of historic wetlands losses with loss of wetlands function and values, regional case studies, and development of indices of cumulative impact for use in permit review.Formerly Director, Office of Federal Activities, US Environmental Protection Agency