Please donate (see sidebar) to help recoup costs of the work to uncover and blog the information contained here

"THE ONLY THING NECESSARY FOR THE TRIUMPH OF EVIL IS FOR GOOD MEN TO DO NOTHING"
--Burke

Friday, September 7, 2007

Air pollution 1985: cost benefit

Arsenic, ASARCO, and EPA: Cost-benefit analysis, public participation, and polluter games in the regulation of hazardous air pollutants.
Call, GD
Ecology Law Quarterly [ECOL. LAW Q.]. Vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 567-617. 1985.

The first part of this comment examines section 112 of the Clean Air Act. The second part discusses the ASARCO smelter as a setting for the regulation of arsenic emissions. The third part examines the first substantive issue, the use of cost-benefit analysis in regulating the emissions of hazardous air pollutants, including the application of cost-benefit analysis to situations where increased emission regulation may lead to plant shutdowns. This part also contrasts standards based on a cost-benefit approach with standards based on a health effects approach. The fourth part examines the role of the public in making decisions regarding hazardous air pollutant emissions. This comment examines public participation through both market and nonmarket mechanisms and then contrasts public participation, in general, with expert decisionmaking. The final part examines the extent to which regulated firms engage in strategic behavior to deceive the regulator and the ability of EPA to prevent such behavior.

Descriptors: {Q1}; Clean Air Act; arsenic; smelting; industrial emissions; pollution control; EPA

No comments: