ipl-logo

Cost-Benefit Analysis Of Act Utilitarianism

806 Words4 Pages

The broad idea of sustainability is become increasingly important in today’s society. Specifically, the topic of climate change is one of the most well known and politically controversial issues that our society is currently facing. An overwhelming majority of the scientific community believes that human activity is the cause of climate change, however, the issue seems to still be up for debate in the eyes of the American public. As greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere, we can expect to observe a wide variety of related events, including: receding polar ice caps, rising sea levels, extreme drought, increased frequency of severe weather, and even displacement of people due to harsh climates. Humanity’s unbridled use of fossil …show more content…

The two predominant types of Utilitarianism are Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. The former evaluates each act on an individual basis, and will be the subject of discussion in this paper. The latter considers a set of established and binding rules, intended to maximize happiness, to evaluate the morality of an action. In both types of Utilitarianism, the action that results in the greatest amount of happiness for all people involved is deemed to be the moral action. Traditionally, Cost-Benefit Analysis is used to make decisions that are affected by economics. The idea is simple; if benefits outweigh the cost, then action should be taken regarding the proposed changes. However, in most situations, including the issue at hand, it can be difficult to properly apply this analysis method. Any cost estimates for replacing fossil fuels with biomass are very rough approximations, and could vary by several orders of magnitude. Currently, the cost of transitioning to biomass processes is projected to be approximately $114 trillion. This figure includes the cost of retrofitting current facilities, building new facilities, as well as other economic factors such as the initial loss and subsequent creation of jobs. Furthermore, the monetary value of human life, as well as costs associated with the effect on quality of life must also be considered, both of which are highly subjective. Switching to biomass-based fuels would help preserve our planet for an untold number of future generations, and is another idea that is difficult, if not impossible, to quantify. While it is not feasible to apply the traditional Cost-Benefit Analysis in this case, the general idea can still be applied. Reducing humanity’s environmental impact by eliminating fossil fuels will, quite literally, save the planet. Any temporary sacrifices made by today’s society will be a

Open Document