Controlling urban air pollution: a benefit-cost assessment

Area of Science:

• Environmental economics
• Air pollution control
• Public health impact assessment

Background:

• Societal resource allocation requires cost-benefit analysis for air quality improvements.
• Ground-level ozone and particulate matter are key pollutants of concern.
• The Los Angeles metropolitan area experiences frequent air quality standard violations.

Purpose of the Study:

• To estimate the economic benefits and costs of proposed air quality control strategies.
• To evaluate controls primarily targeting volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for ozone reduction.
• To assess the economic feasibility of air quality improvements at national and regional (Los Angeles) levels.

Main Methods:

• Economic modeling to quantify benefits and costs of pollution control.
• Focus on reductions in ground-level ozone through volatile organic compound (VOC) control.
• Consideration of particulate matter control strategies.
• Evaluation applied to both the entire United States and the Los Angeles metropolitan area.

Main Results:

• The costs associated with proposed air quality control measures are estimated to exceed their benefits.
• This cost-benefit imbalance is potentially significant.
• Uncertainties exist in the estimations, influencing the final economic assessment.

Conclusions:

• Current proposed air quality controls, particularly for ozone reduction via VOCs, may not be economically efficient.
• The findings suggest a need for re-evaluation of resource allocation for air quality management.
• Further research is needed to address uncertainties in cost-benefit analyses for air pollution control.