Cargando…
What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis
In October 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the level of the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm (annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-h concentration, averaged over three years). The EPA estimated a 2025 annual national...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6121288/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30049975 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15081586 |
_version_ | 1783352432610246656 |
---|---|
author | Lange, Sabine S. Mulholland, Sean E. Honeycutt, Michael E. |
author_facet | Lange, Sabine S. Mulholland, Sean E. Honeycutt, Michael E. |
author_sort | Lange, Sabine S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | In October 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the level of the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm (annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-h concentration, averaged over three years). The EPA estimated a 2025 annual national non-California net benefit of $1.5 to $4.5 billion (2011$, 7% discount rate) for a 0.070 ppm standard, and a −$1.0 to $14 billion net benefit for an alternative 0.065 ppm standard. The purpose of this work is to present a combined toxicological and economic assessment of the EPA’s benefit-cost analysis of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Assessing the quality of the epidemiology studies based on considerations of bias, confounding, chance, integration of evidence, and application of the studies for future population risk estimates, we derived several alternative benefits estimates. We also considered the strengths and weaknesses of the EPA’s cost estimates (e.g., marginal abatement costs), as well as estimates completed by other authors, and provided our own alternative cost estimate. Based on our alternative benefits and cost calculations, we estimated an alternative net benefit of between −$0.3 and $1.8 billion for a 0.070 ppm standard (2011 $, 7% discount rate) and between −$23 and −$17 billion for a 0.065 ppm standard. This work demonstrates that alternative reasonable assumptions can generate very difference cost and benefits estimates that may impact how policy makers view the outcomes of a major rule. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6121288 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61212882018-09-07 What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis Lange, Sabine S. Mulholland, Sean E. Honeycutt, Michael E. Int J Environ Res Public Health Review In October 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the level of the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) from 0.075 ppm to 0.070 ppm (annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-h concentration, averaged over three years). The EPA estimated a 2025 annual national non-California net benefit of $1.5 to $4.5 billion (2011$, 7% discount rate) for a 0.070 ppm standard, and a −$1.0 to $14 billion net benefit for an alternative 0.065 ppm standard. The purpose of this work is to present a combined toxicological and economic assessment of the EPA’s benefit-cost analysis of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Assessing the quality of the epidemiology studies based on considerations of bias, confounding, chance, integration of evidence, and application of the studies for future population risk estimates, we derived several alternative benefits estimates. We also considered the strengths and weaknesses of the EPA’s cost estimates (e.g., marginal abatement costs), as well as estimates completed by other authors, and provided our own alternative cost estimate. Based on our alternative benefits and cost calculations, we estimated an alternative net benefit of between −$0.3 and $1.8 billion for a 0.070 ppm standard (2011 $, 7% discount rate) and between −$23 and −$17 billion for a 0.065 ppm standard. This work demonstrates that alternative reasonable assumptions can generate very difference cost and benefits estimates that may impact how policy makers view the outcomes of a major rule. MDPI 2018-07-26 2018-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6121288/ /pubmed/30049975 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15081586 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Lange, Sabine S. Mulholland, Sean E. Honeycutt, Michael E. What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis |
title | What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis |
title_full | What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis |
title_fullStr | What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis |
title_short | What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis |
title_sort | what are the net benefits of reducing the ozone standard to 65 ppb? an alternative analysis |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6121288/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30049975 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15081586 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT langesabines whatarethenetbenefitsofreducingtheozonestandardto65ppbanalternativeanalysis AT mulhollandseane whatarethenetbenefitsofreducingtheozonestandardto65ppbanalternativeanalysis AT honeycuttmichaele whatarethenetbenefitsofreducingtheozonestandardto65ppbanalternativeanalysis |