suppose that the government of a city with 100,000 people is considering a policy that will result in cleaner, safer drinking water. specifically, the policy targets the amount of arsenic in drinking water supplies. arsenic is a naturally occurring element that also happens to be the active ingredient in rat poison. most drinking water has a bit of arsenic in it. sometimes, that arsenic kills people. current standards mandate that no supply of drinking water may have greater than 50 parts per billion (ppb) arsenic. the proposed standard would remove 80% of that arsenic, reducing tolerance levels to 10 ppb arsenic. however, it will cost suppliers of water an additional $166,120 in equipment for every additional 10 ppb reduced.

suppose that with the current standard (50 ppb) one person out of every 25,000 will die. using the proposed standard (10 ppb),however, only one person out of every 100,000 will die. finally, suppose that after much deliberation it has been agreed that each life lost is worth $201,396. you are an economist who has been called in to decide whether this policy is a good idea.

the marginal monetary benefit of implementing the new policy is$ (enter your response as a whole number.)