Imagine the U.S. Congress is considering legislation that will ban MTBE, a substance added to gasoline to reduce emissions. This
legislation was proposed due to complaints from citizens and interest groups who believe MTBE is a health threat. In a well-written paragraph, analyze whether the benefits of creating this ban are worth the costs.
The benefit are the reduction in partially-burned hydrocarbon emissions in gasoline engines. These particular hydrocarbons tend, when breathed in, to impair lung function over time, and many of them are potent carcinogens, which is why lung cancer rates in urban areas with plenty of tailpipe emissions are higher. The cost is that...well, MTBE tastes vile, can be detected by the human tongue in very small concentrations, and degrades only slowly in the natural environment. Hence if it leaks into groundwater (e.g. from gasoline storage tanks) it can make the water taste icky. It has no other known side-effects. So there you have it: reduction in lung cancer and COPD deaths versus your groundwater maybe tasting icky if your local gasoline station isn't keeping their tanks up to code.
Europeans couldn't travel into the interior of Africa in order to take it over because of the African-ruled trade, couldn't navigate violent rivers, or overpower their strong armies. Disease also held them back.
