Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28405959›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2018

Subsidies to Increase Remote Pollution?

Jana Kliestikova, Anna Krizanova, Tatiana Corejova, Pavol Kral, Erika Spuchlakova

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jana KliestikovaDepartment of Economics, Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications, University of Zilina, Univerzitna 8215/1, 010 26, Zilina, Slovak Republic. jana.kliestikova@fpedas.uniza.sk.
Anna KrizanovaDepartment of Economics, Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications, University of Zilina, Univerzitna 8215/1, 010 26, Zilina, Slovak Republic.
Tatiana CorejovaDepartment of Economics, Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications, University of Zilina, Univerzitna 8215/1, 010 26, Zilina, Slovak Republic.
Pavol KralDepartment of Economics, Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications, University of Zilina, Univerzitna 8215/1, 010 26, Zilina, Slovak Republic.
Erika SpuchlakovaDepartment of Economics, Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications, University of Zilina, Univerzitna 8215/1, 010 26, Zilina, Slovak Republic.

Funding

VEGA 1/0024/15
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the last decade, Central Europe became a cynosure for the world for its unparalleled public support for renewable energy. For instance, the production of electricity from purpose-grown biomass received approximately twice the amount in subsidies as that produced from biowaste. Moreover, the guaranteed purchase price of electricity from solar panels was set approximately five times higher than that from conventional sources. This controversial environmental donation policy led to the devastation of large areas of arable land, a worsening of food availability, unprecedented market distortions, and serious threats to national budgets, among other things. Now, the first proposals to donate the purchase price of electric vehicles (and related infrastructure) from national budgets have appeared for public debate. Advocates of these ideas argue that they can solve the issue of electricity overproduction, and that electric vehicles will reduce emissions in cities. However, our analysis reveals that, as a result of previous scandals, environmental issues have become less significant to local citizens. Given that electric cars are not yet affordable for most people, in terms of local purchasing power, this action would further undermine national budgets. Furthermore, while today's electromobiles produce zero pollution when operated, their sum of emissions (i.e. global warming potential) remains much higher than that of conventional combustion engines. Therefore, we conclude that the mass usage of electromobiles could result in the unethical improvement of a city environment at the expense of marginal regions.

Indexed as

AutomobilesCost-Benefit AnalysisElectricityFinancing, GovernmentRural PopulationTraffic-Related PollutionUrban PopulationBiomassCitiesCommerceConsumer BehaviorEconomicsEnergy-Generating ResourcesEthical AnalysisEuropeGlobal WarmingBuying decision-makingConsumer behaviourEconomic policyRenewables ethics

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.