Advertisement

Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 57, Issue 1, pp 117–143 | Cite as

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

  • Maureen L. CropperEmail author
  • Yi Jiang
  • Anna Alberini
  • Patrick Baur
Article

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 emissions reductions of a program that requires people to buy permits 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 nitrogen oxides (\(\text{ NO }_{\mathrm{x}}\)) 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 33 tons of \(\text{ NO }_{\mathrm{x}}\) per day. The cost per ozone season of achieving these reductions is approximately $9 million (2008 USD). Although year-round measures, such as the Tier II emissions standards, might be preferred on benefit-cost grounds, an episodic permit system might be considered as an interim measure before the Tier II emissions standards are fully reflected in the vehicle fleet.

Keywords

Ground-level ozone Episodic pollution control schemes  Mobile sources Oxides of nitrogen \((\text{ NO }_{\mathrm{x}})\) Cost per ton of \(\text{ NO }_{\mathrm{x}}\) removed 

JEL Classification

Q52 Q53 Q58 

References

  1. Auffhammer M, Kellogg R (2009) Clearing the air? The effects of gasoline content regulation on air quality. CSEM Working Paper 185, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  2. Cummings RG, Walker MB (2000) Measuring the effectiveness of voluntary emission reduction programmes. Appl Econ 32(13):1719–1726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cutter WB, Neidell M (2009) Voluntary information programs and environmental regulation: evidence from “Spare the Air”. J Environ Econ Manag 58(3):253–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davis L (2008) The effect of driving restrictions on air quality in Mexico City. J Political Econ 116(1):38–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davisdon K (2009) Personal communication between Kenneth Davidson, Economist, USEPA, and the authors. January 13, 2009Google Scholar
  6. Fowlie M, Knittel CR, Wolfram C (2008) Sacred cars? Optimal regulation of stationary and non-stationary pollution sources. NBER Working Paper 14504, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  7. Henry GT, Gordon CS (2003) Driving less for better air: impacts of a public information campaign. J Policy Anal Manag 22(1):45–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heuss JM, Kahlbaum DF, Wolff GT (2003) Weekday/weekend ozone differences: what can we learn from them? J Air Waste Manag Assoc 53(7):772–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jiang Y (2009) Do people drive less on code Red Days? Mimeo. Asian Development Bank, ManilaGoogle Scholar
  10. Krinsky I, Robb AL (1986) On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Rev Econ Stat 68(4):715–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Krupnick AJ (1988) Temporal and spatial control of ambient ozone. Discussion paper QE88-05. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. Krupnick AJ, Farrell D (1996) Six steps to a healthier ambient ozone policy. RFF Discussion Paper 96–13, Washington, DC, MarchGoogle Scholar
  13. Lutter R (1999) Is EPA’s ozone standard feasible? Working paper 99–6. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  14. Martin KC, Joskow PL, Ellerman AD (2007) Time and location differentiated NOx control in competitive electricity markets using cap-and-trade mechanisms. CEEPR Working Paper 07-004, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, AprilGoogle Scholar
  15. Mauzerall DL, Sultan B, Kim N, Bradford DF (2005) NOx emissions from large point sources: variability in ozone production, resulting health damages and economic costs. Atmospheric Environ 39:2851–2866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (2006) The composition of vehicle fleet in the Washington metropolitan region. MWCOG, Mimeo. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. Teller A (1967) Air pollution abatement: economic rationality and reality. Daedalus 96(4):1082–1098Google Scholar
  18. U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2003) Ozone: good up high, bad nearby. 451/K-03-001. EPA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. Viard VB, Fu S (2012) The effect of Beijing’s driving restrictions on pollution and economic activity. Draft, March 2012Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maureen L. Cropper
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yi Jiang
    • 2
  • Anna Alberini
    • 3
  • Patrick Baur
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.East Asia DepartmentAsian Development BankManilaPhilippines
  3. 3.Department of Agricultural and Resources EconomicsUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  4. 4.Department of Environmental Science, Policy and ManagementUniversity of California, BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations