Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Benefits and Costs from Sulfur Dioxide Trading: A Distributional Analysis

Contents:

Author Info

  • Cynthia Morgan
  • Ronald J. Shadbegian
  • Wayne B. Gray

Abstract

Policy-makers and others interested in environmental justice (EJ) are concerned that poor and minority communities are disproportionately exposed to pollution. Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments required the dirtiest coal-fired utilities to cap their SO2 emissions at 5.8 million tons per year starting in 1995. At the same time, there was a major regulatory regime change with respect to the regulation of coal-fired utilities, shifting from command-and-control emission standards to a system of tradable allowances. In this paper, we examine the distribution of costs and health benefits across different regions and socioeconomic groups associated with the air quality improvements mandated under Title IV. We examine data on the 148 coal-fired utilities which were regulated under Title IV and find as expected that the monetary benefits of reduced SO2 emissions under Title IV greatly outweigh the costs: we estimate benefits of nearly $56 billion and costs of just $558 million. Not unexpectedly the net benefits are positive in every EPA region, but are highly concentrated. We find that nearly 90% of the benefits and costs of the overall reductions under Title IV are concentrated in 4 regions – the northeast, north central, mid-Atlantic, and southeast. Furthermore, when we examine the socio-economic distribution of net benefits, we find that the poor received slightly lower benefits on average from Title IV, which could raise some EJ concerns, if the poor purchase as much electricity as the rich. On the other hand, the African-American and Hispanic communities received a disproportionately larger share of the benefits relative to their costs. Hence our study indicates that there are no significant EJ concerns raised by Title IV.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/WPNumber/2005-09/$File/2005-09.PDF
File Function: First version, 2005
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in its series NCEE Working Paper Series with number 200509.

as in new window
Length: 30 pages
Date of creation: Dec 2005
Date of revision: Dec 2005
Handle: RePEc:nev:wpaper:wp200509

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone: 202-566-2244
Web page: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/webpages/homepage
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: air quality; Clean Air Act Amendments; environmental justice; Benefits; costs; Trading;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Kenneth Y. Chay & Michael Greenstone, 2003. "Air Quality, Infant Mortality, and the Clean Air Act of 1970," Working Papers 0406, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
  2. Becker Randy A, 2003. "Pollution Abatement Expenditure by U.S. Manufacturing Plants: Do Community Characteristics Matter?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-23, December.
  3. Burtraw, Dallas & Krupnick, Alan & Austin, David & Farrell, Deirdre & Mansur, Erin, 1997. "The Costs and Benefits of Reducing Acid Rain," Discussion Papers dp-97-31-rev, Resources For the Future.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Gabriel Chan & Robert Stavins & Robert Stowe & Richard Sweeney, 2012. "The SO2 Allowance Trading System and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990: Reflections on Twenty Years of Policy Innovation," Working Papers 2012.06, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  2. Meredith Fowlie & Stephen P. Holland & Erin T. Mansur, 2012. "What Do Emissions Markets Deliver and to Whom? Evidence from Southern California's NOx Trading Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 965-93, April.
  3. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2012. "The SO2 Allowance Trading System: The Ironic History of a Grand Policy Experiment," Working Papers 2012.60, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nev:wpaper:wp200509. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Cynthia Morgan).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.