Search

This paper assesses the potential role of the implementation of the best available technologies to reduce the economic consequences of outdoor air pollution in the coming decades. The paper focuses on market impacts related with additional health expenditures, changes in labour productivity and crop yield losses and also presents results on non-market costs, i.e. welfare losses from avoided premature deaths. The results show that technological improvements can potentially reduce concentrations of air pollutants to levels compatible with the WHO guidelines in most countries. However, technology measures can only reduce part of the economic costs relative with the market impacts. While those are efficient in reducing the direct costs of air pollution, there are still large indirect costs associated with current and remaining pollution levels. Policies that aim directly at avoiding economic impacts need to be implemented to further reduce air pollution damages, especially in the regions where technologies are not sufficient to reduce concentrations or where economic consequences persist despite reduced concentration levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The practice of using climate metrics to estimate carbon dioxide equivalent emissions has long been subject to scientific discussion. One strand of this literature has analysed whether the choice of metric affects the relative cost-effectiveness of options for climate change abatement, but there has been little discussion on the effect of metric choices on cost-effective abatement of near-term climate forcers (NTCFs). These NTCFs are air pollutants primarily regulated by policies outside the climate policy arena and their estimated carbon dioxide equivalent emissions are not typically considered in the evaluation of cost-effective abatement. However, the attention to NTCFs as climate forcers has increased during the last decade. The objective of this paper is to identify whether the relative cost-effectiveness of different NTCF abatement options is robust to climate metric choices. We assess nine plausible NTCF abatement options available in Sweden (with negligible effect on long-lived GHG emissions) and evaluate the robustness of the ranking of these, according to their estimated cost-effectiveness. Different metric designs are considered as well as climate impact uncertainty of NTCFs, with corresponding uncertainty in metric values. The results indicate that the choice of metric has little effect on the ranking of the options according to their cost-effectiveness, with options affecting NOx indicated as an exception. This suggests that the choice of metric utilised when calculating cost-effectiveness of NTCF abatement options is likely to have minor effect on which NTCF abatement options should be targeted for policy interventions (if NOx emissions are not significantly affected). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In addition to lower carbon dioxide emissions, policies to reduce fossil fuel combustion can yield substantial air quality co-benefits via reduced emissions of co-pollutants such as particulate matter and air toxics. If co-pollutant intensity (the ratio of co-pollutant impacts to carbon dioxide emissions) varies across pollution sources, efficient policy design would seek greater emissions reductions where co-benefits are higher. The distribution of co-benefits also raises issues of environmental equity. This paper presents evidence on intersectoral, intrasectoral and spatial variations in co-pollutant intensity of industrial point sources in the United States, and discusses options for integrating co-benefits into climate policy design to advance efficiency and equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]