Running head: OPTIMAL POLLUTION 1

Optimal Pollution Versus Zero Pollution

Jenniffer L. Zillmer

Columbia Southern University

MEE 6201 Advanced Pollution Prevention

Professor Kenneth Edwards

November 30, 2014

OPTIMAL POLLUTION 2

Introduction

Technological changes in recent history should enable a society to be pollutant free,

correct? The costs associated with emission and pollution controls may outweigh the potential to

be completely free of all pollutants in the environment. Several studies state there is a direct

correlation between economic sustainability and pollution control and according to Kuznets

curve, there is a limit to the sustainability and lack of economic growth, meaning zero pollution

may not be possible without negatively affecting the economy (Figure 1)(Mazurek, 2011). Other

studies state the exact opposite is true and contradicting Kuznets curve (Ahmadpour, Ghaderi, &

Samimi, 2011). This would lead to one belief that 100% clean air, water and soil is not possible

without directly affecting the economic growth in a developed, technologically savvy society. In

a highly technological society, it is not possible or feasible to have 100% clean air, water and soil

without limiting the economic growth of the society. With proper funding, development and

regulation limitations of nanotechnologies it may be possible to limit the amount of pollution and

increase reuse of materials to a point where optimal pollution can be met.

Figure 1: Environmental Kuznets Curve

(Mazurek, 2011, p.2)

OPTIMAL POLLUTION 3

Background

As researched by numerous individuals there appears to be a direct correlation of the

amount of pollution prevention and the economic growth in developed areas. One study

conducted by Professors Ahmadpour, and students Ghaderi and Samimi, from the University of

Mazandaran, found fault with Kuznets Environmental Curve and found an inverted U-shaped

curve instead of the expected traditional curve, showing economic growth will degrade

environmental sustainability in developing countries (Ahmadpour, Ghaderi, & Samimi, 2011).

The creation of nanotechnologies to for sustainability and energy efficiency have moved to the

forefront of many industries (Gauthier & Genet, 2014). These nanotechnologies are believed to

be the answer to green energy production and cleaner production practices, which Asia seems to

whole-heartedly embraced again, forcing some countries out of the competitive market (Gauthier

& Genet, 2014). Firms appear to be focusing on energy, pollution, and materials nanotechnology

with green initiatives (Gauthier & Genet, 2014). Nanotechnology firms are typically large

companies, with revenue of greater than $140M annually and are already responsible for more

than 75% of the green technologies already created (Gauthier & Genet, 2014).

Methods

Using an applied model including the Environmental Sustainability Index, Gross

Domestic Product (GDP) per Capita, ratio of trade to GPD, industry value added, and

government size the empirical results showed the coefficient is positive and significant

(Ahmadpour, Ghaderi, & Samimi, 2011). Other studies found a higher income lead to higher

environmental quality, showing once a country is developed the environmental impact increases,

but pollution controls also increase (Mazurek, 2011). Although admittedly the research does

appear to show bias towards additional technological advances that could improve environmental
OPTIMAL POLLUTION 4

technologies, very few studies at this time show actual environmental protection or pollution

reduction techniques (Gauthier & Genet, 2014).

“Regression and econometric models were constructed to evaluate the Environmental

Kuznets Curve (EKC)” with a quadratic regression model: y=β0 + β1x = β2x2 + ε1; where y is

emissions of a given pollutant and , x is GDP per capita, β are parameters and ε residuals

(Mazurek, 2011, p.5). One example of the model was conducted with the levels of 91 countries

PM10 levels with the tipping point of 1,308 US $ GPD per capita, showing that larger countries

with a higher GDP may be able to absorb more the impact and still lower emission levels, as has

been seen in recent times (Figure 2) (Mazurek, 2011).

Figure 2: Relationship between GDP per capita in 2008 US $ and concentrations of PM10 in

µg/m3. Logarithmic x and y scale.

(Mazurek, 2011, p.7)

OPTIMAL POLLUTION 5

Emerging trends of economic growth and environmental awareness show increased

scientific and technological advancements in countries where pollution is considered high and

economic growth is also showing an increase emission evaluation and raised health concerns

(Gauthier & Genet, 2014). Whereas countries that are just emerging in economic growth, such as

India, the pollution is both high and technology to control is limited, showing increased

morbidity and mortality rates (Gurjar, Molina & Ojha, 2010). Both indoor and outdoor emission

pollutions in India and other rapidly growing areas, are struggling to decrease the pollution

emissions and create healthy environments due to the poorer areas still using biomass fuels for

cooking and heating, as well as few if any pollution controls on manufacturing and industrial

companies (Gurjar, Molina & Ojha, 2010).

Results

It would appear that most studies support Kuznets Environmental Curve and as developing

countries first start to develop, environmental pollution increases, but then declines as additional

funds then allow environmental pollution control improvement. This is supported by Jain &

Chaudhuri’s and Mazurek studies on reaffirmation of Kuznets curve, dispelling the studies of

Professor Ahmadpour (2009). Both Ahmadpour and Mazurek studies claim there is only an

increase of environmental pollution with a stop of additional improvements once the developed

area is economically sustainable (Ahmadpour, Ghaderi, & Samimi, 2011). Regression and

econometric models were created to evaluate the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) to

specific pollutions and the GDP of the country and the findings were varying depending on the

specific pollutants (Jain & Chaudhuri, 2009).

Additional technological support and scientific measurements are needed to create a more

accurate assessment of pollution from unknown or unregulated toxins, possibly creating

OPTIMAL POLLUTION 6

additional regulations and prevention techniques that could cost additional expenses to already

struggling economic areas, such as the United States (Gurjar, Molina & Ojha, 2010). The small

understanding of minimal emissions that are currently regulated could change drastically in

coming decades, as environmental protection is relatively new to economically developed

nations and completely foreign to several countries that are still working on creating a stable

economy with minimal environmental controls currently implemented.

Conclusion

It appears that the possibility of zero pollutants in air, water and soil would be

economically infeasible and cost of sustaining could potentially bankrupt a country. A better

alternative would be to balance the pollutants to an optimal safe level to avoid health and

environmental concerns to a financial responsibility. As most studies support the possibility of a

more environmentally conscious country with economic stability, it would appear to support the

theory that a developed, technologically inclined country could manage pollutants to a safe level.

This level would be dependent on the GDP and the specific industries present in the country. As

each country would work on increasing nanotechnology and energy conservation, the impacts of

environmental damage from fossil fuel use, known chemical contaminants and other

environmental damage could be limited, the unknown and progressively changing environmental

pollution emission limits could affect each nation differently as the transportation styles and

uniqueness of these pollutants are discovered.

Emerging economic nations, such as India would benefit from having not only better

emission controls, but an understanding of the impact of minimal or limited emission have on

health and environment. The balance of optimal pollution versus over-regulation in certain

countries would show a better fit to the economic stability and health of all nations, rather than
OPTIMAL POLLUTION 7

some nations attempting to limit emissions to the point of stunting economic growth while others

contribute little if any assistance in protection of the planet as a whole. A zero pollution nation,

does not appear feasible or economical when compared to polluted countries that have little or no

emission controls and continue to pull economic stability away from the more responsible,

environmentally conscious nations.

OPTIMAL POLLUTION 8

References

Ahmadpour, M., Ghaderi, S., & Samimi, A. J. (2011). Environmental sustainability and

economic growth: evidence from some developing countries. Advances in Environmental

Biology, 961+. Retrieved from

http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA256863978&v=2.1&u=oran95108&it=r

&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=1bbe7e4ba3c9cb2f2f9169845e000d58

Cheremisinoff, N. P. (2001). Handbook of pollution prevention practices. Weimar, TX: Taylor &

Francis.

Garcia, J. L., Hueso, J. L., & Rubio, S. J. (2009, October). Neoclassical growth, environment and

technological change: the environmental Kuznets curve. The Energy Journal, 30(SI2),

143+. Retrieved from

http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA215787899&v=2.1&u=oran95108&it=r

&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=0bf8f0f3c371390e484648a63443c154

Gauthier, C., & Genet, C. (2014). Nanotechnologies and green knowledge creation: Paradox or

enhancer of sustainable solutions? Journal of Business Ethics, 124(4), 571-583.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1885-x

Gurjar, B. R., Molina, L. T., & Ojha, C. S. P. (2010). Air pollution: Health and environmental

impacts. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Jain, S., & Chaudhuri, T. (2009). The Environmental Kuznets Curve: A Reaffirmation. ICFAI

Journal of Environmental Economics, 7(2), 7-29.

Mazurek, J. (2011). Environmental Kuznets curve--a tie between environmental quality and

economic prosperity. E+M Ekonomie a Management, 14(4), 22+. Retrieved from

OPTIMAL POLLUTION 9

http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA280856036&v=2.1&u=oran95108&it=r

&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=7ba04fc45f798b414ffee7b1b38098f0

Plassmann, F., & Khanna, N. (2006). Preferences, Technology, and the Environment:

Understanding the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis. American Journal of

Agricultural Economics, 88(3), 632-643. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2006.00884.x