skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Making appropriate comparisons of estimated and actual costs of reducing SO{sub 2} emissions under Title IV

Abstract

A current sentiment within some parts of the environmental policy community is that market-based regulatory approaches such as emissions trading have proven so effective that actual costs will be only a small fraction of what ex ante cost estimation procedures would project. With this line of reasoning, some have dismissed available cost estimates for major proposed new regulations, such as the new PM and ozone NAAQS, as not meaningful for policy decisions. The most commonly used evidence in support of this position is the experience with SO{sub 2} reductions under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. In Title IV, a market for emissions allowances has been used to achieve reductions in sulfur dioxides (SO{sub 2}) to ameliorate acid rain. It is commonly asserted today that the cost of achieving the SO{sub 2} emissions reductions has been only one-tenth or less of what Title IV was originally expected to cost. This paper demonstrates that, to the contrary, actual costs for SO{sub 2} reductions remain roughly in line with original estimates associated with Title IV. Erroneous conclusions about Title IV`s costs are due to inappropriate comparisons of a variety of different measures that appear to be comparable only becausemore » they are all stated in dollars per ton. Program cost estimates include the total costs of a fully-implemented regulatory program. The very low costs of Title IV that are commonly cited today are neither directly reflective of a fully implemented Title IV, (which is still many years away) nor reflective of all the costs already incurred. Further, a careful review of history finds that the initial cost estimates that many cite were never associated with Title IV. Technically speaking, people are comparing the estimated control costs for the most-costly power plant associated with earlier acid rain regulatory proposals with prices from a market that do not directly reflect total costs.« less

Authors:
 [1]
  1. DFI/Aeronomics Inc., Washington, DC (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
679433
Report Number(s):
CONF-980632-
TRN: IM9940%%252
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: 91. annual meeting and exhibition of the Air and Waste Management Association, San Diego, CA (United States), 14-18 Jun 1998; Other Information: PBD: 1998; Related Information: Is Part Of Proceedings of the 91. annual meeting and exhibition. Bridging international boundaries: Clean production for environmental stewardship; PB: [5000] p.
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; 29 ENERGY PLANNING AND POLICY; AIR POLLUTION ABATEMENT; SULFUR DIOXIDE; EMISSION; AIR POLLUTION; COST ESTIMATION; PARTICULATES; OZONE; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

Citation Formats

Smith, A.E.. Making appropriate comparisons of estimated and actual costs of reducing SO{sub 2} emissions under Title IV. United States: N. p., 1998. Web.
Smith, A.E.. Making appropriate comparisons of estimated and actual costs of reducing SO{sub 2} emissions under Title IV. United States.
Smith, A.E.. Thu . "Making appropriate comparisons of estimated and actual costs of reducing SO{sub 2} emissions under Title IV". United States. doi:.
@article{osti_679433,
title = {Making appropriate comparisons of estimated and actual costs of reducing SO{sub 2} emissions under Title IV},
author = {Smith, A.E.},
abstractNote = {A current sentiment within some parts of the environmental policy community is that market-based regulatory approaches such as emissions trading have proven so effective that actual costs will be only a small fraction of what ex ante cost estimation procedures would project. With this line of reasoning, some have dismissed available cost estimates for major proposed new regulations, such as the new PM and ozone NAAQS, as not meaningful for policy decisions. The most commonly used evidence in support of this position is the experience with SO{sub 2} reductions under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. In Title IV, a market for emissions allowances has been used to achieve reductions in sulfur dioxides (SO{sub 2}) to ameliorate acid rain. It is commonly asserted today that the cost of achieving the SO{sub 2} emissions reductions has been only one-tenth or less of what Title IV was originally expected to cost. This paper demonstrates that, to the contrary, actual costs for SO{sub 2} reductions remain roughly in line with original estimates associated with Title IV. Erroneous conclusions about Title IV`s costs are due to inappropriate comparisons of a variety of different measures that appear to be comparable only because they are all stated in dollars per ton. Program cost estimates include the total costs of a fully-implemented regulatory program. The very low costs of Title IV that are commonly cited today are neither directly reflective of a fully implemented Title IV, (which is still many years away) nor reflective of all the costs already incurred. Further, a careful review of history finds that the initial cost estimates that many cite were never associated with Title IV. Technically speaking, people are comparing the estimated control costs for the most-costly power plant associated with earlier acid rain regulatory proposals with prices from a market that do not directly reflect total costs.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu Dec 31 00:00:00 EST 1998},
month = {Thu Dec 31 00:00:00 EST 1998}
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • The Energy Modeling Forum working group 12 specified 13 standardized scenarios reflecting a range of carbon emission-control levels, as well as sensitivities on key standardized inputs. These scenarios were ultimately implemented by 14 modeling teams employing a wide variety of technoeconomic models, although not every model could implement every scenario. In addition to these model comparisons, ten study groups were formed to analyze issues not being addressed by the 14 models and 13 scenarios. These groups used additional models and methods to analyze issues not addressed in the 13 original scenarios.
  • To reduce the size and cost of an atmospheric-pressure fluidized-bed combustion (AFBC), a high superficial gas velocity (3 to 4.6 m/s) is required. However, high gas velocities cause high dust loadings (limestone and unburned coal) in the effluent gas stream. High gas velocities, therefore, produce low combustion efficiencies. Pope, Evans and Robbins (PER) have reported combustion efficiencies of approximately 85% at a fluidizing gas velocity of 3.8 m/s. To increase the overall combustion efficiency PER has incorporated into their process a carbon burnup cell (CBC) which operates at a higher temperature than the combustor and a lower fluidizing gas velocitymore » (approximately 1100/sup 0/C, 1.8 m/s). Unburned coal dust removed from the combustor effluent stream by cyclones is injected into the CBC. Pope, Evans and Robbins estimate that the overall combustion efficiency can be increased to approximately 99%. The role of a carbon burnup cell in reducing limestone requirements to meet EPA SO/sub 2/ emission requirements for fluidized-bed coal combustor plants was investigated by evaluating laboratory scale experimental data. Four limestone feed options were analyzed. For Greer limestone the calculations predict that two of the options 2 and 4 would require approximately one-half as much limestone as the others. The reactivities of Tymochtee dolomite and Germany Valley limestone with SO/sub 2/ were compared with that of Greer at identical conditions. Tymochtee dolomite is more reactive than Greer. Germany Valley, being a high-calcium limestone, has poor reactivity and with any of the limestone feed options would require high Ca/S ratios to meet the EPA SO/sub 2/ standard. Again, two of the options were more favorable for Tymochtee and Germany Valley stones.« less
  • This paper reviews the technological and institutional factors involved in achieving long-term reductions in CO{sub 2} emissions in the electric sector. A case study of the New England electric sector is used to illustrate factors associated with energy infrastructure turnover and technology development and use. Opportunities for joint implementation of CO{sub 2} reductions are identified, as well as strategies which leverage CO{sub 2} emissions reductions to achieve reductions in other emissions, and to facilitate cost and environmental risk mitigation. Impacts of environmental performance constraints on the electric industry are also identified and analyzed. 5 figs., 1 tab.
  • In this paper, national and regional forecasts of sulfur dioxide (SO/sub 2/) emissions from various source sectors are presented. The results focus on the effects of alternative economic and regulatory scenarios on the emission patterns. These emission estimates were obtained using the Environmental Trends Analysis Model II (ETAM II), an environmental forecasting model originally developed to support the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) 1983 National Energy Policy Plan (NEPP). Since then, it has been updated with modified algorithms, additional capabilities, and additional data. The resulting model, ETAM II, has been used for policy and sensitivity analyses in support of programsmore » such as the Interagency Disability Task Force and the Interagency Prevention of Significant Deterioration Task Force. ETAM II is unique in that it both covers numerous residuals and all economic sectors discharging those residuals, and it is easy to use for policy analysis purposes.« less
  • This report describes two models CSTM and AUSM, applied to meeting SO{sub 2} emission standards. The CSTM model is a coal market model which models supply and coal prices. The AUSM model is a generating plant level electric utility simulation model. (CBS)