V
v -1
CLEAN AIR ACT
INFORMATION PACKET
TO ACCOMPANY RELEASE
OF SECTION 812 PROSPECTIVE STUDY
NOV. 16,1999
-------
Experience with Clean Air Act implementation, bolstered by the section 812 study,
demonstrates several lessons:
• The CAA is working. It has produced, and is continuing to produce, tremendous health
and economic benefits.
Costs of the 1990 amendments are turning out to be far less than industry estimated
during reauthorization. One reason is that the Clean Air Act creates incentives for
technology advances, and industry repeatedly has met challenges by developing cleaner
technologies.
Benefits typically are underestimated because even today it is impossible to translate
many health and environmental benefits into dollar terms. Also, 'available scientific
studies may provide incomplete information on health and environmental effects of
pollution problems, and later studies may reveal additional effects or effects at lower
levels. Examples from the past include acid rain, stratospheric ozone, lead and particulate
matter. • •
Experience shows that waiting for all uncertainties to be resolved before taking action to
reduce air pollution could have tragic health consequences for the American people. We
must take precautionary action when the weight of the evidence indicates a health or
environmental threat.
Further information and examples are contained in the attached information packet.
-------
INFORMATION PACKET CONTENTS ,.
I. THE SECTION 812 STUDY OF CLEAN AIR ACT BENEFITS AND COSTS
Fact sheet on the 812study: Costs and Benefits of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
Table: Adverse Health Effects Avoided in 2010
Table: Primary Benefit and Cost Results for 2000 and 2010
Tables of unquantified health and ecological benefits
H. THE CLEAN AIR ACT: GETTING RESULTS
• Fact sheet: Cleaning the Air: Progress Since J990
Chart: Emission reductions 1970-1997
Chart: U.S. CFC Consumption
Chart: Air Quality Improvement & Economic Growth in the U.S.
HI. NEW INITIATIVES TO REDUCE SMOG AND PARTICULATE MATTER
Fact Sheet: Maintaining momentum toward clean air: New actions to reduce smog and '
participate matter
IV. THE CLEAN AIR ACT EXPERIENCE: PREDICTIONS VS. REALITY
Fact sheet: Clean Air Act Costs: Predictions vs. Reality
UC-Riverside list: "Examples of Emerging Technologies for the 21st Century"
9 Press releases by Institute for Clean Air Companies:
- market outlook for air pollution control technology
- role of environmental products industry in U.S. economy
For more information on the Clean Air Act and EPA air programs, .see.the home page for the
EPA Office of Air and Radiation on the web: http://www.epa.gov/oar/oarhome.html
-------
I.
THE SECTION 812 STUDY
OF CLEAN AIR ACT
BENEFITS AND COSTS
-------
7/25/00
FACT SHEET
Costs and Benefits of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
EPA STUDY FINDINGS
A November 1999 study by the Environmental Protection Agency - "The Benefits and
Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010: EPA Report to Congress" - confirms that the
large reductions in air pollution being achieved under the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990 are protecting millions of Americans from health effects ranging from premature
mortality to shortness of breath.
This congressionally mandated study of Clean Air Act benefits and costs, the most
comprehensive study of it's type ever conducted, shows that the benefits of the 1990
Amendments substantially exceed the costs. Although any benefit-cost analysis of clean
air programs involves significant uncertainties, the study's central estimate indicates that
benefits exceed costs by a ratio of 4 to 1. This estimate does not take into account the
many health and environmental benefits that could not be translated into dollar terms.
WHAT ARE THE HEALTH BENEFITS OF CLEAN AIR PROGRAMS?
An important finding of the report is the significant number of illnesses and premature
deaths avoided as a result of the 1990 Clean Air Act.
Based on the study's central estimates, the reductions in ground-level ozone, particulate
matter and associated pollutants achieved under Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 are
expected to avoid the following adverse health effects in a single year — 2010:
23,000 incidences of premature mortality
20,000 cases of chronic bronchitis and 47,000 cases of acute bronchitis
91,000 incidence-days of shortness of breath, 1,700,000 asthma attacks, and 7,200
cases of chronic asthma
22,000 respiratory related hospital admissions, 42,000 cardiovascular hospital
admissions, and 4,800 emergency room visits for asthma.
4,100,000 lost work days and 31,000,000 days with restricted activity due to air
pollution-related illness
All of these benefits are in addition to a wide range of benefits that society has
experienced as a result of the 1970 and 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments.
-------
WHAT ARE THE EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM CLEAN AIR PROGRAMS?
Emissions of a wide range of air pollutants will be significantly lower than they would
have been without the additional federal, state, and local clean air programs developed
pursuant to the goals and requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. For
example, by the year 2010 the following reductions are expected to be achieved, relative
to levels projected without the 1990 Clean Air Act programs:
35 percent less smog-causing volatile organic compound emissions;
39 percent less smog- and particulate-forming nitrogen oxide emissions;
• 23 percent less carbon monoxide emissions;
31 percent less particulate-forming sulfur dioxide emissions;
significant reductions in other pollutants such as directly emitted particulate
matter, mercury, and other toxic metal and toxic organic emissions; and
significant reductions in substances which deplete the protective layer of
stratospheric ozone.
It is important to note that benefits are often underestimated hi cost/benefit analyses due
to the fact that health scientists, ecologists, and economists have not yet developed the
data and modeling tools needed to translate many health and environmental benefits into
dollar terms. Furthermore, current scientific studies may provide incomplete information
on health and environmental effects of pollution problems more of which may be
revealed by later studies.
However, experience shows that waiting for all uncertainties to be resolved before taking
action to reduce air pollution could have tragic health consequences for the American
people. Experience with pollutants such as lead, CFCs (chemicals that damage the
stratospheric ozone layer), particulate matter, and acid rain shows the importance of
taking action when the weight of the evidence indicates a health or environmental threat.
WHAT ARE THE COSTS OF CLEAN AIR PROGRAMS?
Costs of pollution reductions to meet the 1990 amendments are turning out to be far less
than original industry estimates. One of the reasons is that the Clean Air Act creates
incentives for technology advances, and innovative companies have repeatedly met
challenges by developing cleaner, more efficient technologies.
EPA's study found that in 2010, the estimated cost of achieving reductions in six major
pollutants under the 1990 Amendments is 27 billion dollars, compared with a central
estimate of monetized benefits of 110 billion dollars. As noted above, any benefit-cost
analysis of clean air programs involves uncertainties.
-------
BACKGROUND ON COST AND BENEFITS REPORT
• Section 812 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 requires that the Environmental
Protection Agency periodically assesses the effect of the Clean Air Act on the public
health, economy, and environment of the country.
• In October 1997, EPA issued a Report to Congress called The Benefits and Costs of the
Clean Air Act: 1970 to 1990. In 1991, as required by the Clean Air Act, EPA's Science
Advisory Board formed an Advisory Council on Clean Air Compliance Analysis. This
group of eminent, independent scientists and economists closely reviewed the design,
implementation, results, and write-up of this retrospective study. The results of the
retrospective analysis revealed that the benefits of the 1970 and 1977 Clean Air Acts have
been tremendous, far exceeding the costs.
• The primary goal of Section 812 is to require EPA to perform thorough analyses of the
costs and benefits of the Clean Air Act. EPA has now completed the first prospective
analysis in this series of assessments, and the analysis demonstrates that -contrary to
industry claims— the benefits of the 1990 Amendments far exceed the costs.
• The retrospective and prospective studies are perhaps the most in depth look at the Clean
Air Act that has ever been performed.
NEXT STEPS
• Many of the emissions reductions examined by the section 812.prospective study are
already being achieved. Under the Clean Air Act, the nation has made great strides in
combating each of the major pollution problems that faced the United States hi 1990:
urban air pollution, toxic air pollution, damage to the stratospheric ozone layer, and acid
rain.
But the nation still has a long way to go to reach the goal of clean air for every American.
EPA is taking a series of actions to maintain the nation's progress in reducing ozone and
particulate matter pollution, while litigation proceeds over the air quality standards for
those pollutants.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
• This study as well as information about the retrospective study are available on the
Internet at (http://www.epa.gov/oar/sect812)
• For further technical information on the report, contact Jim Democker at 202-564-1673,
or E-Mail him at: democker.jim@epa.gov.
-------
ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS AVOIDED IN 2010
(number of incidences)
based on criteria pollutant reductions under 1990 amendments
Health Endpoint Pollutant Mean Estimate
MORTALITY
ages 30 and older PM 23,000
CHRONIC ILLNESS
chronic bronchitis PM 20,000
chronic asthma O3 7,200
HOSPITALIZATION
respiratory admissions PM, CO, NO2, SO2, O3 22,000
cardiovascular admissions PM, CO, NO2, SO2,03 42,000
emergency room visits for PM, O3 4,800
asthma
MINOR ILLNESS
acute bronchitis
upper respiratory symptoms
lower respiratory symptoms
respiratory illness
moderate or worse asthma3
asthma attacks3
chest tightness, shortness of
breath, or wheeze
shortness of breath
work loss days
minor restricted activity
days/any of 1 9 respiratory
PM
PM
PM
N02
PM
O3,PM
SO2
PM
PM
O3,PM
47,000
950,000
520,000
330,000
400,000
1,700,000
110,000
91,000
4,100,000
31,000,000
symptomsb
restricted activity daysa PM 12,000,000
a These health endpoints overlap with the "any-of-19 respiratory symptoms" category.
b Minor restricted activity days and "any-of-19 respiratory symptoms" have
overlapping definitions and are pooled.
Source: Table 5-3, Clean Air Act Section 812 prospective study, November 1999
-------
Table ES-1
Summary Comparison of Benefits and Costs (Estimates in millions 1990$)
Titles I through V
Annual Estimates
2000
2010
Monetized Direct Costs:
Lowa
Central
High3
$19,000
$27,000
Monetized Direct Benefits:
Low"
Central
High"
$16,000
$71 ,000
$160,000
$26,000
$110,000
$270,000
Net Benefits:
Low
Central
High
($3,000)
$52,000
$140,000
($1,000)
$83,000
$240,000
Benefit/Cost Ratio:
Low0
Central
High0
less than 1/1
4/1
more than 8/1
less than 1/1
4/1
more than 10/1
aThe cost estimates for this analysis are based on assumptions about future changes in factors such as consumption
patterns, input costs, and technological innovation. We recognize that these assumptions introduce significant
uncertainty into the cost results; however the degree of uncertainty or bias associated with many of the key factors cannot
be reliably quantified. Thus, we are unable, to present specific low and high cost estimates.
"Low and high benefits estimates are based on primary results and correspond to 5th and 95th percentile results from
statistical uncertainty analysis, incorporating uncertainties in physical effects and valuation steps of benefits analysis.
Other significant sources of uncertainty not reflected include the value of unqualified or unmonetized benefits that are
not captured in the primary estimates and uncertainties in emissions and air quality modeling.
* The low benefit/cost ratio reflects the ratio of the low benefits estimate to the central costs estimate, while the high ratio
reflects the ratio of the high benefits estimate to the central costs estimate.- Because we were unable to reliably quantify
the uncertainty in cost estimates, we present the low estimate as "less than X," and the high estimate as "more than Y",
where X and Y are the low and high benefit/cost ratios, respectively.
-------
Table 5-1
Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
Pollutant
Quantified Health Effects
Unqualified Health Effectsf
Ozone Respiratory symptoms
Minor restricted activity days
Respiratory restricted activity days
Hospital admissions-
All Respiratory and
All Cardiovascular
Emergency room visits for asthma
Asthma attacks
Mortality*
Increased airway responsiveness to stimuli
Inflammation in the lung
Chronic respiratory damage / Premature aging of the lungs
. Acute inflammation and respiratory cell damage
Increased susceptibility to respiratory infection
Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
Neonatal mortality*
Changes in pulmonary function
Chronic respiratory diseases
other than chronic bronchitis
Morphological changes
Altered host defense mechanisms
Cancer
Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
Particulate Mortality*
Matter Bronchitis - Chronic and Acute
(PMio, New asthma cases
PMa.s) Hospital admissions -
All Respiratory and
All Cardiovascular
Emergency room visits for asthma
Lower respiratory illness
Upper respiratory illness
Shortness of breath
Respiratory symptoms
Minor restricted activity days
All restricted activity days
Days of work loss
Moderate or worse asthma status
(asthmatics)
Carbon Hospital Admissions -
Monoxide All Respiratory and
All Cardiovascular
Behavioral effects
Other hospital admissions
Other cardiovascular effects
Developmental effects
Decreased time to onset of angina
Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
Nitrogen Respiratory illness
Oxides Hospital Admissions -
All Respiratory and
All Cardiovascular
Increased airway responsiveness to stimuli
Chronic respiratory damage / Premature aging of the lungs
Inflammation of the lung
Increased susceptibility to respiratory infection
Acute inflammation and respiratory cell damage
Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits '
Sulfur Hospital Admissions -
Dioxide All Respiratory and
All Cardiovascular
In exercising asthmatics:
Chest tightness,
Shortness of breath, or
Wheezing
Changes in pulmonary function
Respiratory symptoms in non-asthmatics
Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
•t Some of the unquantified adverse health effects of air pollution may be associated with adverse health endpoints that we
have quantitatively evaluated (e.g., chronic respiratory damage and premature mortality). However, it is likely that the value
assigned to the quantified endpoint may not fully capture the value of the associated health effect (e.g., chronic respiratory
damage may result in significant pain and suffering prior to mortality). As a result, we include such effects separately in the
unquantified health effects column.
^Appendix D includes detailed discussion of the scientific evidence for these potential health effects and includes illustrative
benefit calculations for them. Current uncertainties in our understanding of these effects do not support including these
quantitative estimates in the overall CAAA benefits estimate. However, ozone-related mortality may be implicitly quantified in
the overall analysis as part of the PM mortality estimate because of the significant correlation between ozone and PM
concentrations.
* This analysis estimates avoided mortality using PM as an indicator of the criteria air pollutant mix to which individuals were
exposed.
-------
Table 7-5
Ecological Effects of Air Pollutants
Pollutant
Quantified Effects
Unquantified Effects
Acidic Deposition
Impacts to recreational
freshwater fishing
Impacts to commercial forests
(e.g., timber, non-timber forest products)
Impacts to commercial freshwater fishing
Watershed damages (water filtration
flood control)
Impacts to recreation in terrestrial
ecosystems (e.g. forest aesthetics,
nature study)
Reduced existence value and option
values for nonacidified ecosystems (e.g.
biodiversity values)
Nitrogen
Deposition
Additional costs of alternative or
displaced nitrogen input controls
for eastern estuaries
Impacts to commercial fishing,
agriculture, and forests
Watershed damages (water filteration,
flood control)
Impacts to recreation in estuarine
ecosystems (e.g. Recreational fishing,
aesthetics, nature study)
Reduced existence value and option
values for non-eutrophied ecosystems
(e.g. biodiversity values)
Tropospheric
Ozone Exposure
Reduced commercial timber
yields and reduced tons of carbon
sequestered
Impacts to recreation in terrestrial
ecosystems (e.g. forest aesthetics,
. nature study)
Reduced existence value and option
values for ozone-impacted ecosystems
Hazardous Air
Pollutant (HAPS)
Deposition
No service flows quantified
Impacts to commercial and recreational
fishing from toxification of fisheries
Reduced existence value and option
values for non-toxified ecosystems (e.g.
biodiversity values)
-------
n.
THE GLEAN AIR ACT:
GETTING RESULTS
-------
CLEANING THE AIR:
PROGRESS SINCE 1990
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 passed Congress with overwhelming support and
were signed onto law by President Bush. This bipartisan legislation set ambitious air pollution
reduction goals and was designed to achieve real results. Since then, the law has substantially
reduced each of the major air pollution problems that faced the United States:
- Acid rain. Annual sulfur dioxide emissions, which react to form acid rain, have been cut
by more than 5 million tons, relative to a 1980 baseline. Most of these reductions have
been achieved from utility power plants through an innovative market-based pollution
allowance trading system. As a result, rainfall in the eastern U.S. is as much as 25 percent
less acidic, and some ecosystems in New England are showing signs of recovery.
Ambient sulfate concentrations have been reduced, leading to improvements in air quality
and significant health benefits. Requirements for nitrogen oxides controls for utilities
already have begun reducing those emissions, and will achieve a 2-million-ton NOx
reduction beginning this year.
— Ozone layer depletion. Production of the most harmful ozone-depleting chemicals has
virtually ceased in the United States. These include CFCs, halons, methyl chloroform,
and carbon tetrachloride. The phaseout will reduce U.S. incidences of non-melanoma
skin cancer by 295 million during the period 1989 through 2075, as well as protect people
from immune system suppression and eye damage leading to cataracts. Provided the U.S.
and the world community maintain the commitment to planned protection efforts, the
stratospheric ozone layer is projected to recover by the mid 21st century.
- Smog and other common pollutants. The air in our nation's cities is substantially
cleaner than in 1990. Ground-level ozone pollution, particulate matter, and carbon
monoxide pollution have all been reduced significantly, producing dramatic decreases in
the number of areas in nonattairiment. Based on 1996-1998 data:
- Of the 42 areas designated hi 1991 as having unhealthy levels of carbon
monoxide, 36 have met the CO air quality standard.
- Of the 98 areas designated as nonattairiment for the one-hour ozone standard, 62
now have air quality meeting that standard.
- Of the 85 particulate matter nonattainment areas, 68 now have air quality meeting
the PM10 standard.
- Pollution from motor vehicles and fuels. Cleaner vehicles and cleaner fuels are one
important reason that the nation's air quality is improving. Today, the average new car
meeting Tier I standards in the 1990 amendments is 40 percent cleaner than the average
new car was in model year 1990. Moreover, automakers have begun selling cars in the
Northeast that are 50 percent cleaner than Tier I cars, and will make these available
1
-------
nationwide by 2001, under an innovative agreement that EPA mediated among the states,
U.S. auto companies and other stakeholders. Further reductions will be achieved by more
stringent tier II standards in conjunction with low-sulfur gasoline. On the fuels side, 30
percent of the gasoline consumed in the U.S., in 18 states, is cleaner-burning reformulated
gasoline, which reduces emissions of smog-forming VOCs and toxics.
Buses and trucks also are getting cleaner. Diesel-powered urban transit buses being built
today release almost 90 percent fewer particulate emissions than buses built in 1990.
Substantial emissions reductions also are being achieved for the first time through
emissions standards for a variety of engines not used in highway vehicles ~ including
locomotives, bulldozers, marine vessels, and lawn and garden equipment.
- Industrial air toxics. Rules issued since 1990 are expected to reduce toxic emissions
from industry by 1.5 million tons a year ~ many times the reductions achieved in the
previous 20 years. These air toxics rules for chemical plants, oil refineries, aerospace
manufacturing and other industries also are achieving large reductions in smog-forming
VOCs and participates.
Overall, between 1990 and 1998, annual emissions of common air pollutants ("criteria
pollutants") dropped by more than 10 million tons, and additional reductions will be achieved by
rules already in place. These results have been achieved through a combination of rules,
voluntary measures, market mechanisms, state partnerships, and stakeholder negotiations.
To recap: The Clean Air Act is working. Although significant pollution problems remain,
the law has substantially reduced each of the major air pollution problems that faced the United
States in 1990.
6/30/00
-------
X
o a
z i
*••
f-J
O 5?
UJ £
~ .2
> to
S» "E
Q m
N-
O
O
1
o
o
jo
(0
•
"o
Q.
^•M
wmmm
<
^l—
o 1
HIM •<+•
(/) -
•M C
c °-
t
m
\
i
•
•
>
•
— ^»
0^
00
O)
CO
o
. —
0^
m
N-
^^^^^^
o
i
Q^
^
5
^
^
3
O
(0
Q.
+
0^
m
CO
o
^Q
"x
o
Q
a
^
U)
—
U"*1
^^» ^^
CO
CO
CO
^^^
"0
-
o
Q.
E
o
o
"E
O)
O
IS
o
—
x^
^i
o
"D
"x
O
C
0
^
C
o
CO
o
^s "^
+ +
'c
OS
a.
o
a.
"0
CD
i-
VIMHI
LL
O
O
E
CO O
o 4=
2 ^
• I^^H 4MM
v c
5*
c B
Op ^ ^
laa ^^
»•»> Q
Z 2
-------
E
3
(0
c
o
o
o
LL
O
CO
m
CO
CO
CO
If)
CN
CN
seuuoi ou;aiAI jo spuesnom
-------
3J
2
>
I
§
•- o
-------
m.
NEW INITIATIVES TO REDUCE
SMOG AND PARTICULATE MATTER
-------
MAINTAINING THE MOMENTUM TOWARD CLEAN AIR-
NEW ACTIONS TO REDUCE SMOG AND PARTICULATE MATTER
Since May, a federal court ruling has delayed implementation of the new, more protective
health standards EPA established in 1997 for ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution. The
decision challenged EPA's legal rationale for the standards, but did not question the underlying
science. Currently, EPA is recommending an appeal of the decision to the Supreme Court. The
Agency continues to believe these standards are essential for protection of public health, and
ultimately will be implemented.
In the meantime, Administrator Carol Browner is determined to keep EPA's emission
reduction initiatives on track and to work with states to reduce health threats from smog and
particulate matter. EPA recently has announced a series of actions to ensure continued progress:
Tier II/Gasoline Sulfur. The Agency is on track to issue more stringent Tier II emissions
standards for cars and light-duty trucks along with rules to cut levels of sulfur in gasoline.
Many metropolitan areas need the emissions reductions from these rules to achieve healthy
air. These final rules will cut nitrogen oxides and other emissions that contribute to ground-
level ozone pollution and particulate matter, acid rain, crop damage and reduced visibility.
Heavy Trucks and Buses/Diesel Sulfur. Administrator Rrnwnm- ;» o^ber announced a
strategy to reduce by more than 90 percent harmful levels of smog-causing NOx and
particulate matter from heavy duty trucks and the very largest sport utility vehicles. The
strategy includes a plan to produce cleaner diesel fuel.
Regional NOx Reductions. EPA will soon take final action on petitions from eight
northeastern states, including NewYork and Pennsylvania, which, call upon EPA to impose
NOx controls on power plants and large industrial combustion sources in 12 upwind states
This action would reduce long-range transport of NOx and ozone pollution that is
contributing to nonattainment problems downwind, as well as reducing pollution in states
where the sources are located. EPA also will propose action on petitions recently received
from additional states. EPA still plans to implement an already issued rule (known as the
"NOx SIP call") that more broadly requires 22 eastern states to cut NOx emissions that -
contribute to the regional ozone problem, assuming legal challenges to the SIP call can be
surmounted.
Ozone Attainment SIPs. For 10 ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious or severe,
EPA.is assessing state plans for demonstrating attainment of the one-hour ozone air quality
standard, which remains in effect for these areas. It appears that many of these areas will
need to commit to additional emissions control measures and/or make other improvements in
their plans before they are approvable. EPA plans, to propose, action on these plans in late
November. •
Nationwide reinstatement of the one-hour ozone air quality standard. Since issuing the more
protective 8-hour ground-level ozone standard in 1997, EPA has revoked the one-hour
standard in nearly 3,000 counties (wherever ozone levels met the old standard). But the
NAAQS court opinion leaves much of the nation without an adequately enforceable ozone
standard to guard against deterioration in air quality. As a result, EPA recently proposed
reinstating the old one-hour ozone standard nationwide.
11/16/99
-------
IV.
THE CLEAN AIR ACT EXPERIENCE:
PREDICTIONS VS. REALITY
-------
CLEAN AIR ACT COSTS: PREDICTIONS VS. REALITY
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 have achieved substantial reductions in air .
pollution at reasonable cost, without the serious economic disruptions predicted by some critics.
Costs of the 1990 amendments are proving to be far less than initial industry estimates.
One reason is that the act's requirements have created pressures and market opportunities
for technological innovation. Technology breakthroughs also have enabled the nation to achieve
pollution reductions that some had predicted to be simply infeasible.
Examples of past predictions
Acid rain program. A utility industry study in 1989 predicted the cost of fully implementing an
acid rain SO2 program at $4.1 billion to $7.4 billion annually. More recent estimates by EPA
(including the November 1999 Section 812 study) and the U.S. General Accounting Office put
these costs at approximately $2 billion, and estimates from independent economists and industry
researchers range as low as $1 billion.
Reformulated gasoline, In 1993, the oil industry estimated that meeting the Act's requirements
for reformulated gasoline would add 16 cents to the price of a gallon of gas. In 1995, the year the
program took effect, an Energy Information Administration survey found that the difference in
price between reformulated and conventional gasoline was 3 cents to 5 cents per gallon. In
November 1999, the EIA survey showed the price difference was only a penny a gallon.
VOC controls to reduce ground-level ozone pollution. The Clean Air Working Group, a key
industry lobbying group during the 1990 reauthorization effort, said in August 1990 that
stationary source VOC control requirements later enacted as part of Title I of the 1990
amendments would cost an estimated $14.8 billion per year. With the benefit of updated
information, EPA (based on its November 1999 Section 812 study) now estimates the cost of
Title I stationary source VOC controls at approximately $3.9 billion in 2010.
Protection of stratospheric ozone layer. A chemical company spokesman testified in January
1990 that accelerating the phase-out of ozone-depleting CFCs to January 1996 would cause
severe economic and social disruption. At the same hearing, a refrigeration industry
representative testified, "We will see shutdowns of refrigeration equipment in
supermarkets....We will see shutdowns of chiller machines, which cool our large office buildings,
our hotels, and hospitals." In fact, the phase-out of CFC production was accomplished without
such disruptions. Chemical companies helped make this possible by rapidly developing
alternatives to CFCs.
Motor vehicle emissions standards. A major American auto company representative in 1989
testified that "we just do not have the technology to comply" with the initial Tier I tightening of
tailpipe standards that became part of the 1990 amendments. Nonetheless, the auto industry was
able to begin producing vehicles meeting the standards in 1993. More recently, the auto industry
1
-------
entered into a voluntary agreement with EPA and states to produce even cleaner, low emission
vehicles that are already being sold in some areas and will be available nationwide in 2001.
Technology Innovation and the Clean Air Act
As some of these examples show, the Clean Air Act has helped lead to technology
innovation and performance improvements. Over and over again, innovative companies have
responded with great success, producing breakthroughs such as alternatives to ozone-depleting
chemicals and new super-performing catalysts for automobile emissions.
There are many examples of technologies that were not commercially available a dozen
years ago, but that now are important parts of pollution control programs. These include:
Selective Catalytic' Reduction (SCR) for NOX emissions from power plants
Gas reburn technology for NOX
Scrubbers which achieve 95% SO2 control on utility boilers
Sophisticated new valve seals and detection equipment to control leaks
Water and powder-based coatings to replace petroleum-based formulations
Reformulated gasoline
LEVs (Low-Emitting Vehicles) that are far cleaner than had been believed
possible in the late 1980s (an additional 95% reduction over the 1975 controls)
Reformulated lower VOC paints and consumer products
Safer, cleaner, burning, wood stoves
Dry cleaning equipment which recycles perchlorethylene
CFC-free air conditioners, refrigerators and solvents
This pattern of technological progress is continuing today. In the regulatory impact
statement for the 1997 ozone and PM NAAQS, EPA identified a number of emerging
technologies — ranging from fuel cells to ozone-destroying catalysts to new coating technologies
— that may hold promise for achieving additional cost effective reductions of VOC, NOx and
particulate matter. Similarly, the University of California-Riverside's Center for Environmental
Research & Technology has identified a long list of new and emerging technologies that may
help achieve cleaner air in the 21st century (see attached document). EPA can help foster demand
for clean technologies by promoting market-based strategies that create a market for the most
efficient, best performing technologies.
Conclusion
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 have substantially improved the nation's air
quality - at costs substantially less than initially predicted by industry. One reason is that the act
has created market opportunities and has promoted technological innovations. This has helped
the nation achieve cleaner air in conjunction with strong economic growth.
4/25/00
-------
Document prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by the University of California- Riverside
Bourns College of Engineering, Center for Environmental Research & Technology - October 1999
Examples of Emerging Technologies for the 21st Century
It seems that the technological innovation that has been spurred to date by Clean Air Act requirements is just the tip
of the iceberg. Hundreds of new products are under development, in testing, or coming into the market that will
further help meet air quality requirements. The following list includes new and emerging technologies that can help
to reduce air pollution emissions and may help achieve cleaner air for all Americans in the 21st Century.
1. Mobile Source
Fuel Cell and Electric and Electric Hybrid Vehicles
GM Fuel Cell Electric EV1 . . '
GMParallel Hybrid EV1, Series EV1
Nissan Motor Corporation Altra EV
DaimlerChrysler New Electric Car (NECAR) 4
Solectria Corporation Solectria Sunrise
Zevco Millennium Taxi
TbyotoFCEV
Toyota e-com
Toyota Prius Sedan
Dodge Intrepid ESX2
Robert Wright & Company ECE City Bus
Chrysler Motor Corporation 1999 Electric Minivan (EPIC)
TH/NK Nordic AS THINK (EV)
Volvo Power Split Hybrid Research Car
Honda Insight (hybrid electric)
Alternative Fuel Vehicles
GMCNGEV1
Toyota Camry CNG
Honda GX (Natural Gas)
Ford Crown Victoria Dedicated NGV
DaimlerChrysler 1999 NGV RAM Van/Wagon
For JEconoline Dedicated NGV
Ford F-Series Dedicated NGV
Warsitz Hydrogen Spirit
Hybrid Electric Buses and Trucks
Coval H2 Partners T-1000 Neighborhood Truck
ISE Research Corporation ThunderVolt 701 and ThunderVolt 801-H (Heavy Duty Electric Trucks)
Canadian Electric Vehicles Ltd'Might-E-Truck
Toyota Motor Corporation Coaster (Hybrid Bus)
-------
Alternative Fueled Trucks & Engines
Chevrolet/GMC Medium Duty Conventional Truck
Mack Trucks E7G Natural Gas Series (LE and MR)
CMC Sierra Bi-Fuel CNG Pickup
PawerTech 8.1 L CNG Engines
Fiba Canning CNG & LNG Industrial Heavy duty Vehicles
John Deere 6081H Natural Gas
Cummins C8.3 G and 10 G (CNG/LNG)
Caterpillar 3176B, C-10, C-12 (CNG/Diesel dual fuel)
Detroit Diesel Series 50G/60G Natural Gas
Detroit Diesel Efhanol Series
Cleaner Small Engines
eCycle Inc. eCycle (electric)
Zap Bikes Electricycle(electric)
Electric MotorBikes Inc. Lectra (electric)
Corbin-Pacific, Inc. Sparrow P.T.M. (electric)
Advanced Engine Technologies, Inc. QX2 Internal Combustion Engine
Other Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Devices (all in R&D stage)
FUELS
ELFAquitaine Aquazole (Diesel fuel)
TCPI, Inc Dr. Diesel™ (Diesel fuel additive)
AG Environmental Products, L.L. C SoyGold Marine™ (Marine Fuel Additive)
AG Environmental Products L.L.C SoyDiesel (diesel fuel additive)
ENGINES
Toyota Motor Corporation Direct-Injection 4-Stroke Gasoline Engine
Volvo Car Corporation Volvo Petrol Direct Injection
Caterpillar Dual-Fuel Engines (CNG, LNG, Diesel)
Honda ZLEV and Integrated Motor Assist
CATALYSTS & OTHER POST COMBUSTION TECHNOLOGIES
Engelhard Corporation PdPLUS™ catalyst PTX Catalyst TriMax™ Catalyst
Volvo Car Corporation Chemically Heated Catalyst
National Renewable Energy Laboratory andBentler Industries Variable Conductance Insulation (VCI)
catalytic converter
Siemens Automotive SINOx
Volvo Car Corporation and Engelhard Corporation PremAir™ catalyst
Johnson Matthey Cam Converter Technology (CCT™)
Engelhard Corporation DPX Soot Filter & STX Diesel Soot Filter
Engelhard Corporation CMX Converter Muffler
National Renewable Energy Laboratory andBenteler Industries Vacuum-Insulated Variable Conductance
Catalytic Converter
OTHER
Volvo Car Corporation Integrated Starter Generator .
Engelhard Corporation: GPX Coatings (applied to internal combustion components to reduce emissions,
improve fuel economy and increase power output)
-------
2. Stationary Source
Renewable Resource Fuels & Energy
Biomass
Hynol High Efficiency Biomass Fuel Production Process (currently in testing at the University of
California Riverside)
Syntroleum Corporation The Syntroleum Process®
BG Technologies LLC BG Systems (biomass conversion system)
Synergy Technologies Corporation Syngen •. •
FLS miljo Group Biomass-fired Boiler
Solar
Solar Energy Limited Hydro Air Renewable Power Systems (HARPS)
BP Solar EUCLIDES™ Concentrator
BP Solar APOLLO® Thin Films
BP Solar LGBG Mono-Crystalline Modules
Green Mountain Solar"" Polycrystalline Modules
SunLab Solar Two
UNI-SOLAR Electric Modules
Siemens Solar Industries Copper Indium DiSelenide (CIS) thin film modules
Wind Power
Southwest Windpower AIR wind module
Advanced Wind Power, Inc. AWT-26
New World Power Technology North Wind 250
Zond Systems Z-40
Energy Reduction Devices
AMCEC Inc AMCEC ECOVAP (latent heat recovery process)
Praxis Engineers, Inc BANGS (control system)
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Energy-10 (energy-efficient software for new buildings)
Praxis Engineers, Inc. PECOS™ & SCYCLOPS™ (plant optimization software)
Power Integrations, Inc. TinySwitch Integrated Circuit (electrical reduction chip)
Syntha Corporation Syntha 2000 (plant optimization software)
Stationary Fuel Cells
Energy Research Corporation Direct Fuel Cell (DFC)
Zevco Alkaline Fuel Cell
BCS Technology Forced-Flow PEM Fuel Cell
H Power Corporation EPAC™-PowerPEM®-D35, PowerPEM®-PS250 PowerPEM®-RW35
PowerPEM®-SSG50
Energy Partners NG2000
Ceramic Fuel Cells Ltd. Ceramic Fuel Cell
Global Thermoelectric R & D Solid Oxide Fuel Cell
Warsitz WFC 25 and WFC 50 Series High Performance Fuel Cells
-------
Catalysts
General Catalysts
CO/VOC
Goal Line Environmental Technologies LLC ADCAT™ CO Oxidation Catalyst
Johnson Matthey DualOx™Catalyst
Engelhard GEN™ diesel oxidation catalyst
MIRATECH Corporation Oxidation Catalyst
Glenro Catalytic Fume Oxidizer (used in hot air drying ovens.)
Prototech Company PRO*PEL-VOC pellets
Prototech Company PRO*BROIL™ catalyst (restaurant applications)
Engelhard Corporation CharCat900 Catalyst (restaurant applications)
Smith Environmental Corporation Catalytic Oxidizers, Direct-Fired Oxidizers., Smith PTO™ system
Goal Line Environmental Technologies SCOVOx
NOx
Detroit Stoker Company METHANE de-NOx™
Johnson Matthey SCR Catalyst
Engelhard VNX™ Catalyst
Catalytica Combustion Systems XONON™ Combustion System
Catalytic Combustion Corporation Monolith Catalysts
Other
Casso-Solar Gas Catalytic Heaters (used in Infrared (IR) heating systems)
Regenerative Catalytic Oxidizers
Huntington Environmental Systems Econ-Abator® Regenerative Catalytic Oxydizers & Econ-Nox™ Catalysts
Huntington Environmental Systems HES/RCO
Johnson Matthey RCO Catalyst
Goal Line Environmental Technologies SCONOx™ Catalyst System
Regenerative Thermal Oxidizers
Huntington Environmental Systems HES/RTO
Adwest Technologies, Inc RETOX® Regenerative Thermal Oxidizers
Durr Environmental, Inc Reeco RE-THERM® RL
Durr Environmental, Inc TAR Recuperative Thermal Oxidizer
Durr Environmental, Inc Ecopure® - Recuperative Thermal Oxidizer
Smith Environmental Corporation Smith RTO/TCO
Smith Thermal Recuperative Oxidizer SCO
Ozone Destroying Catalyst
Volvo Corporation & Engelhard Corporation Premair
Ultra Low-NOx Gas Fired Burners
Bloom Engineering Co Gemini Ultra2 Low NOx Burner Series
Combustion Tec Throughport Fishtail Burner & Mine Burner Firing
Combustion Tec Oxygen Enriched Air Staging
Coen Company Distributed Air Flow (DAF) Low NOx Burner
Clayton Industries Low NOx/CO Steam Generators
Coen Company Quantum Low NOx (QLN) burner
-------
John Zink Company Cool Fuel (low NOx burner retrofit)
Detroit Stoker Company DETROIT® DB Low NOx Burner
Dyson Hotwork Limited Low NOx Regenerative Burner .
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation FlamemastEER &EER Reburn Process
FLS miljo Group Benson-Type Power Station Boiler
Radian International Radian Rapid Mix Burner (RMB)
Parker Boiler Company Premix Metal Fiber Burner
Coating Technologies
Low VOC primers & coatings
United Coatings ACRYLEX 300 acrylic metal primer, and Primer 707 wood primer
American Formulating and Manufacturing low VOC interior and exterior primer
American Formulating and Manufacturing Safecoat Enamels
Benjamin Moore & Co. Eco Spec Interior Latex Flat 219 Semi-Gloss 224
United Coatings Interior and Exterior flat paints and roof coating
Madison Chemical Industries, Inc. Madison Alumizinc 2000™ (primer/coating on tanks)
Madison Chemical Industries, Inc. Madison Corropipe IITX-15 pipe coating
Zero VOC primers & coatings
Evans Manufacturing, Inc Evans Peel Coat, Type I, II, HI & IV coatings
Silvertown Products, Inc. Wood Defense wood finish
NonToxiCA Inc. Interior Flat Paint Series 100-1, and interior satin Series 200-1 paint
Spectra-Tone® Paint Corporation Spectra-Tone® Enviro Interior Enamel (8800) & Semigloss (9900)
Vianova RESYDROL® Emulsions coatings, high gloss enamels, and wood stains and varnishes
Electrostatic Technology, Inc. ETI Powder Coating System
Madison Chemical Industries, Inc Madison Corrocote IIPW™ water pipe sealer
Madison Chemical Industries, Inc Madison Corrocote II Plus™ underground tank sealer
Madison Chemical Industries, Inc Madison Marithane II Multi marine coating
Material Application Technologies
American Turbine, Inc. HVLP AT-Series
Lemmer Spray Systems Ltd. Lemmer T-55 HVLP
The Better Paint Tray LLC
Nordson Corporation Centuty® Selective Conformal Coating System
Solvent-Free Adhesives and Cleaners
Low VOC Metal and General Cleaners
Durr Environmental KFA '(carbon fiber adsorption)-
Detrex Corporation Modular Detrex batch cleaning system
Epcon® Industrial Systems, Inc. Epcon® Deoilers
Micro Care Corporation ExPoxy™ Remover
PCI of America HURRISAFE brake cleaners, carburetor, high pressure degreasers
Sulzer Metco Plasma Spray
Micell Technologies Inc. Miclean™ degreaser
PCI of America HURRISAFE 9000 series (general cleaners)
CRC Industries HydroForce™ Butyl-Free All Purpose Cleaner
Micro Care Corporation VeriClean Flux Remover
-------
Zero-VOC Metal & Parts Cleaners
NW Technologies, Inc PC Series
Oakite Products, Inc Oakite® Gardoclean A5502
RotoJet of America Co., Roto-Jet Spray Washing Cabinet
ChemFree™ Corporation ChemFree SmartWasher®, SmartWasher® Supersink
Detrex Corporation Detrex Series rotating basket washer and spray jet parts washer
Kleer-Flo Company Greaseoff™ multi-metal cleaner
CAR Alpheus Inc CO2 MiniBlast ™ Model SDI-5
Drumbeaters of America, Inc Cryo-Cleaner® System
Zero-VOC Electronic Parts Cleaners
Micro Care Corporation OS-20 Precision Cleaner
Smart Sonic Corporation SmarTsonic® Model 2000 & Model 4200
Other Solvent Related Technologies
TransGlobal Environmental Products TranSolv Technology (recycles industrial solvent waste)
John Zink Series 2000™ Vapor Combustion System
AMCEC Inc Solvent Recovery Systems
Baker Furnace, Inc BIOTON® ( biological oxidation system )
Geomembrane Technologies, Inc Membrane Cover and Liner Systems
3. Other Cleaner Consumer Products
Lawn & Garden
Lawn-Boy Electric Series of Lawnmowers
Toro® CafeFree electric mowers
Black & Decker CMM1000 electric Lawnmower
GrassMasters LawnPup
Ryobi Outdoor Products, Inc. TrimmerPlus 1090r (electric trimmer)
Clean Power & Fuels
United Solar Systems Corporation Unipower USF-32, USF-11, USF-5 (portable solar battery chargers)
Green Mountain Energy Resources Solar*"1 Thin Films for rooftops
Solarex Millennia™ (rooftop solar cells)
ACR Solar International, Inc. Fireball 2001 (solar water heater)
Warsitz Enterprises, Inc. HydroGrill™ (barbeque)
Warsitz Enterprises, Inc. RoamPower™ (portable Hydrogen power)
-------
CONTACT: RELEASE DATE: '
Jeffrey C. Smith, tel: 202.457.0911 September 29, 1999
IMPROVED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL TECHNOLOGY MARKETS TO CONTINUE
AT LEAST THROUGH 2002
Total Air Pollution Control Technology Market to Hover Around $3 Billion a Year
Washington, D.C. The Institute of Clean Air Companies, Inc. (ICAC), forecasts that the overall U.S.
market for air pollution control and monitoring technology, which has risen significantly from levels earlier this
decade, will increase gradually at least through 2002. Most technology sectors of the overall industry will
increase marginally over this time frame, and the largest sector will be for NOX controls.
Commenting on these findings, ICAC Executive Director Jeff Smith stated: "The air pollution control
and monitoring technology industry is ready to respond with cost-effective compliance solutions to this
increased need to reduce emissions, of air pollutants".
The 72-page Market Forecast analyzes the U.S. market for electrostatic precipitators, fabric filters,
VOC and NOX control systems, wet particulate scrubbers, flue gas desulfurization systems, and continuous
emission monitors annually through year 2002. The report also estimates aftermarket bookings.
"The forecast shows that the markets for most individual technology sectors in the industry will remain
strong, giving the air pollution control technology industry some momentum over the forecast period, a positive
change from the relatively low business volumes that characterized the industry earlier this decade. The
industry welcomes the forecasted trends, and is optimistic that clean air initiatives and economic growth will
sustain this momentum beyond the 2002 forecast horizon. Full, common-sense implementation and
enforcement of the Clean Air. Act — which .opinion polls show that the U.S. public enthusiastically supports
to protect its health and environment — will pay a dividend of new American jobs in the engineering and
construction industries as these pollution control technologies are installed," Smith added.
Accompanying each product forecast is an analysis of market trends and the technological, regulatory,
and general market influences. Historical statistics and a statistical forecast summary in both constant and
inflated dollars are also included.
ICAC's September 1999 Market Forecast is available ($795) to the public. To order, send a check
or purchase order to ICAC, 1660 L Street, N.W., Suite 1100, Washington, D.C. 20036. To place a telephone
order using AMEX, or to request a free copy of the report's table of contents, call ICAC's Sharon Jenkins tel-
202.457.0911.
ICAC is the nonprofit association of companies that supply air pollution control technology and
monitoring systems. Its mission is, in part, to work to assure clean air policy that promotes public health,
environmental benefit, and industrial progress, [end]
1660 L Street, NW • Suite 1100 « Washington, DC 20036 ® 202-457-0911 » Fax 202-331-1388 • E-mail: jsmith@icac.com
-------
-------
Notes (cont'd):
3. Id- . .
4. Goodstein E.B., Jobs and the Environment, Economic Policy Institute, 1994 pp 7-12
~M^ST^S^^^
Science, vol. 17 1Q«Q a • nenen[s- UMfcCrA Tnfp.maf.^r,a; Journal nf Mariafrem^nt
K, Jbfe Q^pettte^ ^^0™/ matAre fcjtoteue?. World Resources Institute,
7 .Business Week, Do Pollution Regs Cost Jobs? November 16 1998
ICAC . 1660 L St., N.W. * Suite 110 . Washington, B.C. 20036 . Tel: 202.457.0911 * Fax: 202331.1388
------- |