z-logo
Premium
The social cost of trading: Measuring the increased damages from sulfur dioxide trading in the United States
Author(s) -
Henry David D.,
Muller Nicholas Z.,
Mendelsohn Robert O.
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
journal of policy analysis and management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.898
H-Index - 84
eISSN - 1520-6688
pISSN - 0276-8739
DOI - 10.1002/pam.20584
Subject(s) - damages , allowance (engineering) , emissions trading , ton , clean air act , sulfur dioxide , agency (philosophy) , business , agricultural economics , natural resource economics , economics , environmental protection , environmental science , finance , air pollution , operations management , greenhouse gas , geography , law , political science , chemistry , ecology , philosophy , archaeology , organic chemistry , epistemology , biology , inorganic chemistry
The sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) cap and trade program established in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments is celebrated for reducing abatement costs ($0.7 to $2.1 billion per year) by allowing emissions allowances to be traded. Unfortunately, places with high marginal costs also tend to have high marginal damages. Ton‐for‐ton trading reduces emissions in low damage areas (rural) while increasing emissions in high damage areas (cities). From 2000 to 2007, conservative estimates of the value of mortality risk suggest that trades increased damages from $0.8 to $1.1 billion annually relative to the initial allowance allocation and from $1.5 to $1.9 billion annually relative to a uniform performance standard. With U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) values, trades increased damages from $2.4 to $3.2 billion annually compared to the initial allowance allocation and from $4.4 to $5.4 billion compared to a uniform performance standard. It is not clear that the ton‐for‐ton SO 2 cap and trade program is actually more efficient than comparable command and control programs. The trading program needs to be modified so that tons are weighted by their marginal damage. © 2011 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here