FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 10, 1997
Michael Tebo (202) 328-5019 [email protected] http://www.rff.org
RFF PRIMER OUTLINES KEY ISSUES IN THE DEBATE OVER TIGHTER AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
WASHINGTON, DC -- As Congress begins to consider the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposals to tighten standards for two major air pollutants, Resources for the Future (RFF) today releases a briefing paper on the key issues in the clean air debate. Titled "Revising the Air Quality Standards" and authored by RFF journalist-in-residence J.W. Anderson, the primer describes EPA's proposed new rules for ground-level ozone and particulate matter (PM), both of which have been linked to adverse effects on human health. It also discusses the major policy questions that the proposals raise.
EPA unveiled its proposed revisions in November 1996 after concluding that current air standards did not adequately protect the public's health -- especially the elderly and people with respiratory problems. But opponents of the new standards say the regulations would be too expensive and would lead to only marginal improvements in air quality. EPA has recently extended its public comment period, which was set to expire February 18, for another 60 days to allow more time for stakeholders to voice their opinions to decisionmakers.
In the primer, Anderson points out that EPA makes a much stronger case for reducing PM than for reducing ozone. Although reducing either pollutant would be expensive, says Anderson, EPA's estimates indicate that Americans would receive a much higher return for their money, in terms of health benefits, from reducing PM levels than ozone levels. He also addresses whether it is even possible for some cities to meet the present ozone standard, let alone the proposed tighter standard.
RFF's briefing paper is available at its internet site (http://www.rff.org). A hard-copy version can be ordered by calling (202) 328-5000.
# # #
RFF RESEARCH AND PUBLICATIONS ON AIR QUALITY ISSUES
The Costs and Benefits of Title IV: An Integrated Assessment with TAF David Austin, Dallas Burtraw, Alan Krupnick, Deirdre Farrell and Erin Mansur, Resources for the Future; Cary Bloyd, Argonne National Lab, paper presented at the Air and Waste Management Specialty Conference; January 1997.
"What is the Value of Reduced Morbidity in Taiwan?" Maureen Cropper, Anna Alberini, Alan Krupnick, Tsu-Tan Fu, Jin-Tan Liu, Daigee Shaw and Winston Harrington, article in The Economics of Pollution Control in Asian Pacific, edited by Robert Mendelsohn and Daigee Shaw; 1996.
"Revising the Ozone Standard"* Alan Krupnick and J.W. Anderson, Resources article; Fall 1996.
1987 Revision of the NAAQS for Particulate Matter; 1993 Decision Not to Revise the NAAQS for Ozone: Two Case Studies in EPA's Use of Science* Mark Powell, RFF Discussion Paper 97-07; November 1996.
Six Steps to a Healthier Ambient Ozone Policy* Alan Krupnick and Deirdre Farrell, Discussion Paper 96-13; April 1996.
Implementation and Enforcement of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990* Alan Krupnick, Testimony before the Committee on Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives; November 9, 1995.
Air Quality and Electricity Deregulation
A Shock to the System: Restructuring America's Electricity Industry Timothy Brennan, Karen Palmer, Raymond Kopp, Alan Krupnick, Vito Stagliano, and Dallas Burtraw, RFF Book; July1996.
Electricity Restructuring and Regional Air Pollution* Karen Palmer and Dallas Burtraw, Discussion Paper 96-17; July 1996.
The Second-Best Use of Social Cost Estimates* Dallas Burtraw and Alan Krupnick, Discussion Paper 96-29; August 1996.
"Air Quality and Electricity: What Competition May Mean"* Dallas Burtraw, Alan Krupnick, and Karen Palmer, Resources article; Spring 1996.
"Trading Emissions to Clean the Air: Exchanges Few but Savings Many"* Dallas Burtraw, Resources article; Winter 1996.
Air Quality and Transportation Issues
"Transportation and Air Pollution: The Environmental Damages" Alan Krupnick, Robert Rowe and Carolyn Lang; forthcoming discussion paper.
Public Support for Pollution Fee Policies for Motor Vehicles: Survey Results* Alan Krupnick, Winston Harrington, and Anna Alberini, Discussion Paper 97-13; December 1996.
Who's in the Driver's Seat? Mobile Source Policy in the U.S. Federal System* Winston Harrington, Virginia McConnell, and Margaret Walls; Discussion Paper 96-34; September 1996.
Economic Incentive Policies Under Uncertainty: The Case of Vehicle Emissions Fees* Winston Harrington, Virginia McConnell, and Anna Alberini, Discussion Paper 96-32; August 1996.
Fuel Economy and Motor Vehicle Emissions* Winston Harrington, Discussion Paper 96-28; July 1996.
Distributional Impacts of an Environmental Tax Shift: The Case of Motor Vehicle Emissions Taxes* Margaret Walls and Jean Hanson, Discussion Paper 96-11; January 1996.
Evaluating the Costs of Compliance with Mobile Source Emission Control Requirements: A Retrospective Analysis* Virginia McConnell, Margaret A. Walls, and Winston Harrington, Discussion Paper 95-36; August 1995.
"The Wrong Way to Test Your Tailpipe"* Winston Harrington and Virginia McConnell, Washington Post Outlook Section; March 31, 1995.
All materials are available upon request. To order, call (202) 328-5000.
* Available at RFF's internet site -- http://www.rff.org.
# # #
RSS