IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/feemdp/60749.html

Getting Cars Off the Road: The Cost-Effectiveness of an Episodic Pollution Control Program

Author

Listed:
  • Cropper, Maureen L.
  • Jiang, Yi
  • Alberini, Anna
  • Baur, Patrick

Abstract

Ground level ozone remains a serious problem in the United States. Because ozone non-attainment is a summer problem, episodic rather than continuous controls of ozone precursors are possible. We evaluate the costs and effectiveness of an episodic scheme that requires people to buy permits in order to drive on high ozone days. We estimate the demand function for permits based on a survey of 1,300 households in the Washington, DC metropolitan area. Assuming that all vehicle owners comply with the scheme, the permit program would reduce VOCs by 50 tons and NOx by 42 tons per Code Red day at a permit price of $75. Allowing for non-compliance by 15% of respondents reduces the effectiveness of the scheme to 39 tons of VOCs and 33 tons of NOx per day. The cost per ozone season of achieving these reductions is approximately $9 million (2008 USD). This compares favorably with permanent methods of reducing VOCs that cost $645 per ton per year.

Suggested Citation

  • Cropper, Maureen L. & Jiang, Yi & Alberini, Anna & Baur, Patrick, 2010. "Getting Cars Off the Road: The Cost-Effectiveness of an Episodic Pollution Control Program," Sustainable Development Papers 60749, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:feemdp:60749
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.60749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/60749/files/NDL2010-046.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.60749?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Viard, V. Brian & Fu, Shihe, 2015. "The effect of Beijing's driving restrictions on pollution and economic activity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 98-115.
    2. Beaudoin, Justin & Chen, Yuan & Heres, David R. & Kheiravar, Khaled H. & Lade, Gabriel E. & Yi, Fujin & Zhang, Wei & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2018. "Environmental Policies in the Transportation Sector: Taxes, Subsidies, Mandates, Restrictions, and Investment," ISU General Staff Papers 201808150700001050, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    3. Ola Andersson & Pol Campos‐Mercade & Fredrik Carlsson & Florian H. Schneider & Erik Wengström, 2022. "The impact of stay‐at‐home policies on individual welfare," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(2), pages 340-362, April.
    4. Caplan, Arthur J. & Acharya, Ramjee, 2019. "Optimal vehicle use in the presence of episodic mobile-source air pollution," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 185-204.
    5. repec:col:000089:016856 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Hongyou Lu & Yunchan Zhu & Yu Qi & Jinliang Yu, 2018. "Do Urban Subway Openings Reduce PM 2.5 Concentrations? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.
    7. Allen Blackman & Francisco Alpízar & Fredrik Carlsson & Marisol Rivera Planter, 2018. "A Contingent Valuation Approach to Estimating Regulatory Costs: Mexico’s Day without Driving Program," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(3), pages 607-641.
    8. Blackman, Allen & Qin, Ping & Yang, Jun, 2020. "How costly are driving restrictions? Contingent valuation evidence from Beijing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:feemdp:60749. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.