-** r.
230-2-87-025E
United States
Environment^ Protection
Agency
Office of Policy Analysis
Office of Policy, Planning
and Evaluation
February, 1987
Unfinished Business:
A Comparative Assessment
of Environmental Problems
Appendix IV
Welfare Risk Work Group
-------
AN ASSESSMENT OF
WELFARE EFFECTS FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
77 West Jackson Boulevard, 12th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
Comparative Risk Project
February 1987
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1; Introduction
Procedure for Ranking Welfare Effects 1-2
Methodological Issues 1~3
Chapter 2; Material Damages and Soiling
Introduction 2-1
Major Problems 2-1
Particulate Matter 2-1
Acid Precipitation 2-4
Sulfur Dioxide 2-6
Minor Problems • 2-7
Drinking Water As It Arrives at the Tap 2-8
Ambient Ozone • 2-8
Lead 2-10
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion 2-10
Nitrogen Dioxide 2-12
Summary 2-14
Chapter 3; Reduced Recreational Opportunities
Introduction 3-1
Major Problems 3-1
Discharges from Direct and Indirect
Point Sources and Nonpoint Sources
to Surface Waters 3-1
To Estuaries, Coastal Waters, and
Oceans from All Sources 3-7
Minor Problems 3-9
Acid Precipitation 3-9
Other Pesticide Risks 3-10
Summary 3-10
-------
Chapter 4; Environmental Damage to Natural Resources
Introduction 4-1
Difficulties in Assessing Damages
to Natural Resources 4-1
Method Used to Rank Environmental Problems 4-4
Major Problems 4-6
Atmospheric Ozone 4-6
Acid Precipitation 4-7
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion 4-9
Discharges from Nonpoint Sources to
Surface Water 4-10
CO2 and Global Warming 4-11
Biotechnology 4-12
Minor Problems 4-12
To Estuaries, Coastal Waters, and Oceans
from all Sources 4-12
To Wetlands from all Sources 4-13
Hazardous/Toxic Air Pollutants 4-14
Discharges from Direct Point Sources
to Surface Waters 4-14
Discharges from Indirect Point Sources
to Surface Waters 4-14
Other Criteria Air Pollutants 4-14
Mining Waste 4-15
Accidental Releases of Toxics 4-15
Accidental Oil Spills 4-15
Active Hazardous Waste Sites 4-16
Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites 4-16
Contaminated Sludge 4-16
Other Pesticide Risks 4-16
Other Ground-Water Contamination 4-16
Summary 4-17
Chapter 5; Damages to Commercial and Public
Property and to Ground-Water Supplies
Introduction 5-1
Major Problems 5-1
C02 and Global Warming 5-1
Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites 5-3
Nonhazardous Municipal Waste Sites 5-5
11
-------
Active Hazardous Waste Sites 5-7
Nonhazardous Industrial Waste Sites 5-7
Releases from Storage Tanks 5-7
Accidental Releases of Toxics 5-8
Indoor Radon 5-9
Minor Problems 5-9
Other Pesticide Risks 5-9
Other Ground-Water Contamination 5-10
Radiation Other Than Radon 5-10
Summary 5-10
Chapter 6; Aesthetic and Nonuser Values
Introduction 6-1
Environmental Problems Affecting Aesthetics 6-1
Criteria Air Pollutants 6-1
Other Air Pollutants: Odors 6-7
Other Air Pollutants: Noise 6-7
Nonuse Values of Environmental Resources 6-8
Surface Water 6-9
Ground Water 6-10
Air Quality 6-13
Summary 6-14
Chapter 7; Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
Introduction 7-1
Summary of Rationales for Rankings 7-3
Criteria Air Pollutants 7-3
Water Pollution 7-3
Global Warming and Stratospheric
Ozone Depletion 7-9
Other Air Pollutants (Noise and Odors) 7-9
Discharges from Direct Point Sources 7-10
Waste Sites 7-10
Wetlands 7-10
Pesticides 7-11
Biotechnology 7-11
111
-------
Recommendations 7-11
EPA Offices Should Intensify Their
Welfare Assessment Activities 7-11
Rankings Should Be Viewed as Only
a General Indication of the
Relative Severity of Welfare Effects 7-12
Research Should Continue on
CO2/Global Warming and
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion 7-12
EPA Should Evaluate the Welfare
Effects of Noise Pollution. 7-12
Pesticide Effects Should Be
Assessed Separately 7-12
EPA Should Conduct More Research on
the Use, Option, and Existence Values
of Protecting Ground Water 7-13
EPA Should Improve Techniques for Assessing
the Effects of Uncontrolled Biotechnology
and Other Unlikely Catastrophic Events 7-13
Welfare Effects of Contaminated Drinking
Water Need to Be Better Quantified 7-13
EPA Should Reassess Its Priorities to
to Better Reflect the
Severity of Welfare Effects 7-14
Appendices
Appendix A: References for the Welfare Effects Work Group
Report A-l
IV
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table # Page
1-1 Coding System for Environmental Problems 1-3
2-1 Ranking of Environmental Problems That
Damage and Soil Materials 2-2
3-1 Ranking of Environmental Problems That
Cause Recreational Damages 3-2
3-2 Values of Various Levels of Water Quality 3-4
3-3 Proportion of Substandard Surface Waters
Primarily Affected by Specific Sources 3-6
3-4 Estimates of the Recreational Values of
Selected Estuaries 3-8
4-1 Ranking of Environmental Problems That
Affect Natural Resources 4-2
4-2 Summary of Quantitative Estimates from
Available Studies 4-3
4-3 Commercial Value of Existing Natural Resources 4-5
5-1 Rankings of Environmental Problems: Damages
to Property and Ground-Water Supplies 5-2
6-1 Ranking of Environmental Problems That Hinder
Aesthetic Experiences 6-2
6-2 Summary of Damages from Impaired Visibility 6-6
6-3 U.S. Population Exposed to Noise Levels
Exceeding 55 Ldn, by Noise Source 6-8
6-4 Use and Intrinsic Values from Current Studies 6-11
6-5 Values Related to Ground Water 6-12
7-1 Final Rankings of Welfare Effects Work Group 7-2
7-2 Summary of Ranking of Welfare Effects 7-4
-------
Chapter 1
Introduction
Environmental pollution can cause diverse welfare losses,
ranging from impaired visibility to reduced commercial fishing
yields to losses in the property values of residences located
near hazardous waste disposal sites. The definition of a wel-
fare effect is not precise. Welfare effects from exposure to
environmental pollution represent declines in the value of any
commercial activity and declines in the value of other human
activities. Activities related directly to human health are
excluded from the welfare effects category, since these have
been treated by other work groups on this project.
The Welfare Effects work group was established to rank the
31 environmental problems according to the severity of the
actual and potential welfare damages they may cause. The work
group was composed of senior managers from offices throughout
EPA.
Ranking the 31 environmental problems was difficult, prin-
cipally because of incomplete information about their effects
and different levels of aggregration among the problems. Many
types of welfare effects have never been assessed comprehensive-
ly. Even for welfare effects that have been analyzed extensive-
ly, only a small portion of the studies has been scientifically
validated or reviewed by peers. Also, the basis for ranking
some environmental problems has been a single or a few case
studies. In these situations, we qualitatively weighed the
evidence to assess the magnitude of effects. Because of the
paucity of information, to a great degree these rankings depend
on our subjective evaluations.
We also ranked environmental problems within five distinct
categories of welfare losses. These are soiling and material
damages (Chapter 2), recreational losses (Chapter 3), damage
to natural resources (Chapter 4), damage to commercial and
public property and to ground-water supplies (Chapter 5), and
losses in aesthetic and nonuser values (Chapter 6). To give
readers a better basis for understanding these rankings, this
introduction discusses the procedures we followed in ranking
the welfare effects and discusses some methodological issues
associated with this effort. Chapter 7 presents a detailed
rationale for our ranking and some recommendations based on
the results of this effort.
1-1
-------
PROCEDURE FOR RANKING WELFARE EFFECTS
We were asked by the Chairperson to fill out a set of fact
sheets that detailed the types of welfare risks related to each
of our programs. The fact sheets briefly describe each environ-
mental problem, note the studies that have been conducted on
the welfare effects the problem poses, present an estimate of
the damages expected from the problem, and point out any serious
methodological limitations of the studies the damage estimate
is based on. To draw out relevant studies and data and to ensure
the accuracy of our conclusions, we circulated the fact sheets to
all of the relevant program offices for review and comment.
Because one goal of this project was to generate cross-
fertilization between program offices, we grouped the fact
sheets by type of welfare effect, instead of along programmatic
lines. The topics we examined encompassed the full range of
welfare effects: soiling and other material damages; recreation;
natural resources; damages to other public and commercial prop-
erty and ground-water supplies, and losses in aesthetics and nonuser
values. These fact sheets formed the basis for Chapters 2 through
6 of this report.
Before ranking the environmental problems, we established
the following ground rules to ensure consistency in accounting
for the significance of environmental problems:
0 Quantify effects as best as possible. Even when infor-
mation about the extent of effects is sketchy or prelim-
inary, weigh it so that the effects of alternative en-
vironmental problems can be projected.
0 If possible, present a monetary estimate of damages.
A monetary numeraire or unit provides a common basis
for comparing effects across environmental settings.
0 When possible, annualize monetary damages, and convert
them into 1986 dollars.
0 Aggregate damage estimates to a national basis whenever
possible.
0 Evaluate only current and future environmental effects—
not effects that current EPA programs have already elim-
inated. This project is only concerned about ranking
so-called uncaptured, or residual, effects.
0 Rank future effects lower than present effects, all. else
being held constant.
1-2
-------
We next ranked the 31 environmental problems. Each member
first ranked the problems separately. Then, based on these
individual rankings, the full work group constructed a composite
ranking of the 31 environmental problems.
To facilitate the ranking and to allow for an accurate
reporting of effects, we established ranges for expressing the
relative severity of the damages from different environmental
problems. This system presents our estimates of the national
annual reductions in damages that would result from reducing
pollution to levels that would exist in the absence of man-made
polluting activities (background levels). When quantitative
studies of damages were available, we listed their numerical
values. Where information about annual damages was unavailable
or incomplete, we expressed our best judgment of the severity
of damages in terms of order-of-magnitude estimates. Table
1-1 shows these codes and their corresponding damage ranges.
Table 1-1
Coding System for Environmental Problems
Description of Damages Code
Damage Range
Extremely Significant (XS)
Significant (S)
Moderate (M)
Low (L)
Not Applicable or Near
Zero (-)
Uncertain (?)
$1 billion or more per year
$100 million-$999 million per year
$10 million-$99 million per year
$1 million-$9 million per year
$0 to several million per year
Subject to too great uncertainty
for judgment
The dollar ranges associated with each code are not intended
to imply a great degree of precision. Instead, they serve to sys-
tematically distinguish a small from a large effect. Although
these judgments are inherently subjective, they give interested
parties a sense of the basis for the final rankings of the
environmental problems.
METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES
The original 31 environmental problems represent an overlap-
ping set of sources, receptors, and pollutants. In many cases,
we had difficulty classifying effects based upon the 31 problems.
1-3
-------
For instance, many of the welfare effects from pesticides are
attributed to two environmental problems: Nonpoint Source Dis-
charges to Surface Waters (a source category) and To Estuaries,
Coastal Waters, and Oceans from All Sources (a receptor category).
As a result, the environmental problem Other Pesticide Risks
is ranked lower than if these effects were considered as a sep-
arate source category. Thus, knowing what types of effects are
included in each of the environmental problems is important for
interpreting the rankings.
We also had difficulty ranking environmental problems with
less severe welfare effects. Consequently, we are not confident
of the relative rankings for this group of environmental problems.
Finally, it was not clear how to distinguish "welfare"
effects from "health" or "ecosystem" effects. Often it is dif-
ficult to compartmentalize environmental problems into this set
of categories. Partly, this is the result of the multidimensional
nature of many environmental problems. Also, in many cases, the
scientific literature and economic valuation techniques do not
adequately distinguish effects by these separate categories.
For example, reductions in the property values of residen-
ces close to a hazardous waste disposal site may at first appear
to be welfare losses. In this case, a welfare loss is defined
as a loss in the commercial value of an asset or a good due to
its exposure to an environmental pollutant. However, it could
be argued that the reductions reflect peoples' responses to a
"health" threat. Thus, the case could be made that reductions
in property values indicate the amount people must be compensated
to bear added cancer and noncancer risks and therefore should
be evaluated in the health reports of this project.
Alternatively, suppose that risk assessments indicate that
only small health effects can be documented as a consequence of
the hazardous waste disposal site. This might be the case if many
of the health effects were perceived but could not readily be
identified. In this situation, it would be less clear as to
whether to attribute the declines in property values to a
"health" effect.*
A further complexity is introduced if health effects are mis-
perceived. In this case, the possibility exists that the
owners of residences may sell their properties at a discount to
buyers who accurately appraise the health effects from the
hazardous waste site. As a result, the welfare losses would
actually be transfers from the original owners of the resi-
dences to the buyers.
1-4
-------
A final complication is that property values may decline
because of the unsightliness of the hazardous waste site
facility, the operation of the site, the activities in the
general area, or the pollution produced from the site. Declines
resulting from the pollution would clearly be in the domain of
environmental "welfare" losses; however, declines from the
other three factors would not. Unfortunately, the literature
on property value losses from hazardous waste sites has not
attempted to attribute damages to different types of effects (nor
is it clear that such distinctions can be made).
Similarly, problems result when attempting to distinguish
"welfare" from "ecosystem" effects. In many cases, an environ-
mental problem may fall into either type of effects. For in-
stance, acid precipitation may reduce the diversity of forests
(an ecoystem loss), thereby changing animal populations and
limiting hunting opportunities (a welfare loss).
In cases of this sort, this report classifies welfare
effects as those that are likely to result in losses to commer-
cial activity or losses that can be monetized. On the other
hand, ecosystem effects are effects that can be monetized in
theory, but the techniques for doing so are too unreliable to be
particularly useful or meaningful.
Given all the gaps in our knowledge, it was virtually impos-
sible to sort out many of the complicated issues in evaluating
welfare effects. We attempted to characterize welfare effects
as accurately as possible, while explicitly recognizing the many
difficulties associated with an effort of this nature. We gen-
erally included in our assessments welfare effects that are
intertwined with health and ecosystem affects. Thus, double
counting is likely to be present in the reports of the four
work groups.
1-5
-------
Chapter 2
Material Damages and Soiling
INTRODUCTION
Air and water pollutants can damage natural and man-made
materials. For example, they corrode metals, erode paint and
stone, crack paint and polymers, and discolor and soil fabrics.
Materials at risk are typically buildings, bridges, pipes, cul-
tural artifacts, machines, and clothing.
Because of the variety of materials and the complexity
of the ways air and water pollutants damage them, estimating
monetary damages is very difficult. In general, such estima-
tion is based on measures of increased maintenance and repair
of materials or more frequent replacement of them.
Table 2-1 lists the specific environmental problems that
damage and soil materials, and ranks them according to the
severity of the harm they cause. Because criteria air pollu-
tants are such a large source of material damages, the table
ranks each criteria air pollutant separately.
This chapter discusses these environmental problems, esti-
mates the monetary damages from them, and explains how these
estimates were developed and the limitations behind them.
MAJOR PROBLEMS
As Table 2-1 shows, three criteria pollutants damage mater-
ials significantly: particulate matter, acid precipitation, and
sulfur dioxide.
Particulate Matter
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants (#1))
Particulate matter is a generic term that covers various
combinations of sizes and chemical constituents of particles
emitted into the atmosphere. The National Ambient Air Quality
Standard for particulate matter is currently based upon total
suspended particulates (TSP), but may soon be changed to cover
only particles smaller than 10 microns. This section assesses
material damages from TSP, since most of the literature on this
subject is based upon this measure of particulate matter.
2-1
-------
Table 2-1
Ranking of Environmental Problems
That Damage and Soil Materials
(billions of 1986 $)
Rank
Environmental
Problems
Damage to
Manufacturing
Materials
Damage to
Residential
Materials
Damage to
Commercial
Materials
N5
N3
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
Major Problems
Criteria Air Pollutants
Particulate Matter (1A) 3.2
Acid Precipitation (IB) <
Sulfur Dioxide (1C) <
Minor Problems
Drinking Water as It
Arrives at the Tap
Criteria Air Pollutants
Ambient Ozone (ID) ?
Nitrogen Dioxide (IE) ?
Lead (IF)
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion ?
15.5
-2.8-
—1.7-
?
?
S
?
M/L
M/S
M/S
Key to Effects;.
effects:
Letter codes correspond to order-of-magnitude ranges for annual
XS = Extremely Significant: damages of $1 billion or more.
S = Significant: damages of $100 million-$999 million.
M = Moderate: damages of $10 million-$99 million.
L = Low: damages of $1 million-$9 million.
-- = Not available or near 0: damages of $0 to several million dollars.
(?)= Uncertain: potentially high damages, but subject to great uncertainty,
-------
Problem Characteristics
Particulate matter results in increased material damages and
soiling to households and manufacturing firms. As a consequence,
households and firms may increase their expenditures on cleaning
materials and activities. In 1983, 6.9 million metric tons of
TSP were emitted to the atmosphere (EPA, 1985b, pp. 3-9). The
annual geometric mean of TSP that year was 48.7 micrograms/cubic
meter (ug/m^). Stationary sources, such as electric utilities,
accounted for 80 percent of total 1983 emissions.
Research Approaches
Quantitative estimates of material damages and soiling have
been derived from two studies: Mathtech 1982a and 1982b. The
household soiling model described in Mathtech (1982a) is an
econometric model that estimates the effects of TSP on the allo-
cation of household budgets. Cross-sectional data on prices and
expenditures from 24 large standard metropolitan statistical
areas were analyzed for 21 aggregate goods. This analysis
indicated that TSP is a significant factor in the demand for
household cleaning goods and household utilities.
Mathetech (1982b) also developed a model that was designed
to estimate TSP-related damages in the manufacturing sector.
The hypothesis was that higher concentrations of TSP would
increase costs of production due to increased expenditures for
maintenance and repair of inventory or in-place capital equip-
ment. Extrapolated estimates of reductions of TSP to background
levels were developed under the assumption that the response
function is approximately linear in TSP.
Estimated Damages
The Mathtech household model estimated unit damages to be
$0.80 per household per microgram of change in TSP. Based upon
this figure, the total damage estimate for household soiling
nationally was $15.5 billion annually.
The study of manufacturing damages found that two sectors
of the economy--fabricated structural metal products and metal-
working machinery--incurred extra costs of about $3.2 billion
annually due to TSP. Thus, total damages from TSP nationally
were found to be approximately $18.7 billion annually.
Research Limitations
Because of data limitations, this research calculated TSP-
induced damages for only a few manufacturing sectors, thus poten-
tially accounting for only a portion of manufacturing losses. In
addition, it did not estimate damages in other sectors.
2-3
-------
Acid Precipitation
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants (#1))
This section focuses on material damages resulting from
acid precipitation (wet deposition). Effects related to dry
deposition are evaluated in the sections that discuss gaseous
sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide.
Problem Characteristics
Acid precipitation deteriorates paint, accelerates the
corrosion of metals, and dissolves stone and mortar. These
damages can be observed on buildings; such infrastructures as
bridges, transmission towers, and guard rails; and cultural
artifacts. Cultural artifacts, such as statues, monuments, and
buildings with carved stone surfaces, are generally composed
of bronze, marble, or limestone, and are sensitive to natural
weathering and elevated levels of acidic deposition.
The observed trend toward lower pH (more acidic) values in
rainfall in the northeastern United States has been linked to
increased emissions of sulfur dioxide from coal-fired power
plants in the Midwest. However, questions have been raised as
to the specific form of the relationship between the sources
and receptors of acid precipitation.
Despite a consensus that emissions of sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen dioxide are precursors of acidic deposition, our
review foregoes joint consideration of primary sulfur dioxide
(or nitrogen dioxide) and associated transformation products.
Research Approaches
In a draft report prepared for EPA, Horst et al. (1986)
estimated the economic damages to buildings from current levels
of acidic deposition. They measured the rate at which acidic
deposition accelerates damage and leads to more frequent repair
or replacement of materials.
The materials analyzed were paint (with silicate and car-
bonate extenders), zinc, stone, and mortar. Separate estimates
of exposed areas for these materials were available for roofs,
walls, chimneys, gutters and downspouts, and fencing. The esti-
mates were derived from detailed ground surveys conducted in
New Haven, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Portland, Maine, by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Merry and LaPotin, 1985).
In estimating economic damages to materials, Horst et al.
relied on four assumptions:
2-4
-------
0 The physical stock of materials is constant over time.
0 Sulfur dioxide and pH values are constant over time.
0 Real maintenance costs are constant over time.
0 Surface vintages are uniformly distributed over time.
With these assumptions, economic costs were computed for current
and baseline levels of environmental quality.
Quantitative estimates of damage to infrastructures caused
by acid precipitation are unavailable. However, studies have
been completed that assess infrastructural damages due to pre-
cursor pollutants. These damages are addressed in the sections
of this chapter that examine the impacts of sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen dioxide.
Economic damages have been estimated for cultural artifacts
as part of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program.
The draft assessment chapter on material damages describes re-
cent work by Rae (1984) that considered an inventory of statues,
monuments, and historical buildings in the eastern United States.
Damages for these items were computed on a replacement-cost
basis (marble/limestone) or through an evaluation of long-term
maintenance costs (bronze). The assessment was careful to note
that the avoidance or replacement costs may have understated
willingness to pay for certain items that are considered essen-
tially irreplaceble.
Estimated Damages
Horst et al. estimated that if pH levels were reduced to
background levels (5.6), the total annual cost savings for build-
ings would be $2.6 million for New Haven, $0.9 million for Port-
land, $18.0 million for Cincinnati, and $49.9 million for Pitts-
burgh .
These results are transformed into a normalized, weighted
average of $16.82 per person per unit change in pH. This esti-
mate can be used to approximate national cost savings by exam-
ining the joint relationship between population and pH in areas
other than the case study cities. The derived national estimate
is an annual value of $2.8 billion.
For cultural artifacts, the annualized damages are about
$6.4 million. These damages are about an order of magnitude
below the low estimate for common construction materials, but
this estimate neglects willingness to pay for irreplaceable
objects.
2-5
-------
Research Limitations
The $2.8 billion estimate covers urban areas only and is
limited to the materials identified above. The report on which
this estimate is based (Horst et al., 1986) is being reviewed,
so the damage estimates should be regarded as preliminary.
Furthermore, the data used to develop the case study estimates
are subject to considerable uncertainty. It is believed that
the range of damages could span at least an order of magnitude.
Sulfur Dioxide
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants (#1))
This section considers material damages from the dry depo-
sition of SO2« The previous section discussed the welfare los-
ses from wet acid precipitation.
Problem Characteristics
Sulfur dioxide (802) is produced largely by oil and coal
combustion and nonferrous smelters. Electric utilities and in-
dustrial boilers are the principal emitters of SO2- In 1982,
they represented 67 percent and 11 percent, respectively, of SC>2
emissions. According to a recent SC>2 staff paper,
sulfur dioxide has been associated with the cor-
rosion of ferrous and nonferrous metals, [with the]
degradation of zinc and other protective coatings,
and with the deterioration of inorganic building
materials (e.g., concrete and limestone) as well as
paper, leather goods, works of historical interest,
and certain textiles. (EPA, 1982c, p. 100)
In 1983, the mean annual average concentrations of SO2
across 89 National Air Monitoring Sites and a wider set of
286 sites were 0.0115 and 0.0096, respectively (EPA, 1985b, pp.
3-13). The background level of SC>2 is less than 0.0019 part
per million (ppm) annual arithmetic mean.
Research Approaches
Mathtech (1985a) analyzed the benefits of developing new
source performance standards for controlling SC>2 from new indus-
trial boilers. To calculate how much households are willing
to pay for reductions in SO2> Mathtech used the Mathtech house-
hold soiling model, which describes the relationship between
SC>2 and the demand for various consumer goods.
2-6
-------
Mathtech used a two-step procedure to estimate the national
damages from sulfur dioxide. First, it developed an estimate
of annual damages per ton on a per-person basis. Second, it
used the normalized damages estimate to approximate the nation-
wide savings of reducing SO2 to background levels. It based
this estimation on 1983 county-by-county emission data provided
by EPA.
Mathtech (1983) and (1985b) analyzed the effects of SC>2 on
maintenance costs for a range of exterior structures, developed
an inventory of materials and then estimated the costs of main-
tenance activities, calculated the statewide mean of SO2 concen-
trations, and constructed a damage function. It used this infor-
mation to calculate the benefits of reducing SO2 to a selected
low level. The maintained behavioral assumption was that repair
activities occur at a fixed level of corrosion, called the
"critical loss level." As SC>2 was reduced, more time elapsed
before this level of corrosion was reached. Mathtech reduced
annualized maintenance costs accordingly.
Estimated Damages
The research approach (Mathtech 1985a) yielded an annual
estimate of the reduced material damage in the household sector
if all S02 emissions from human activities were eliminated.
The potential gains ranged from $0.32 to $3.2 billion, with a
point estimate of $1.7 billion.
The Mathtech studies of exterior structures yielded a total-
damage estimate of $291 million per year. Damage to exterior
painted surfaces accounted for $278 million (95%) of this total.
Damage to other structures—including chainlink fences, galva-
nized wire, steet bridges, and transmission towers--in aggregate
accounted for the remaining $13.8 million (5%) of the total.
Research Limitations
The Mathtech 1985a analysis provides only approximate
measures of actual damages, since it does not consider adaptive
behavior. The estimates have limited materials coverage.
MINOR PROBLEMS
As Table 2-1 shows, the environmental problems considered
to cause minor material damages and soiling are Drinking Water
As It Arrives at the Tap (#15); ambient ozone (#1D), nitrogen
dioxide (#1E), and lead (#1F), which are subsets of Criteria
Air Pollutants (#1); and Stratospheric Ozone Depletion (#7).
2-7
-------
Drinking Water As It Arrives at the Tap (#15)
Problem Characteristics
Most water leaving public water treatment plants is rela-
tively free of lead. However, corrosive water can cause the
widespread leaching of lead and other corrosion by-products
(e.g., copper and cadmium) into municipal water systems. While
lead-containing materials can be corroded at water treatment
plants, lead contamination occurs more often in water distribu-
tion systems and in household plumbing. Corrosive water can
also break pipes, damage water meters and storage facilities,
cause water loss, require excess repair and replacement of
equipment, contaminate water due to leaks, increase pumping
costs because of the reduced hydraulic efficiency of corroded
or partly blocked pipes, cause a loss of service pressure, and
raise the operating costs of providing water to customers.
Research Approaches
Many studies have sought to determine the extent of mate-
rial damages to water distribution and household plumbing systems
from corrosive water that also causes leaching of lead. Esti-
mates of potential damages vary widely (Kennedy Engineers (1973)
and (1979) and Ryder (1980)). These studies also have estimated
the damages that could be avoided by controlling corrosion.
Estimated Damages
Studies have generally been divided between the economic
costs incurred by (or occuring to) water utilities and private
households. Estimates have been developed both for the country
as a whole and for every household (the household estimate is
then extrapolated to the nation). Based upon a midpoint figure
of $8.50 per person, the national damages from corrosive water
are roughly $537 million in avoidable costs for the 60-65 mil-
lion people receiving the water (EPA 1986).
Research Limitations
Results of treatment in the field can differ from results ob-
tained in the laboratory.
Ambient Ozone
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants (fl))
Problem Characteristics
Unlike other criteria air pollutants, ozone (03) is not
directly emitted by sources of pollution. Rather, ozone is
2-8
-------
formed in the atmosphere through a series of chemical reactions
involving volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), oxygen, and sunlight. In 1983, VOC and NOX emissions led
to an average second-highest daily maximum one-hour ozone
concentration of 0.146 ppm at National Air Monitoring Sites.
Background levels for ozone range between 0.01 and 0.05 ppm.
The Ozone Criteria Document and Staff Paper (1985d) identify
three categories of materials as being sensitive to ozone:
textiles, paints, and elastomers. The impacts of ozone on
textiles depend on its ambient concentration in combination with
other factors, such as relative humidity, type of material, and
moisture.
Estimated Damages
Ozone may damage both the dye and fiber strength of tex-
tiles. There are insufficent data to allow for a monetary
estimate of damages to dyes, but according to EPA, "the limited
research . . . indicates that ozone in ambient air may have
minimal effects on textile fibers" (EPA, 1985d, p. 41).
Elastomers appear to be the product most vulnerable to
material damage from ozone. If ozone were decreased, tire
manufacturers could reduce their expenditures on antiozonants,
and might see an increase in the number of used tire casings
suitable for retreading. The Ozone Criteria Document estimated
that the current annual cost of antiozonants for tires is
$166 million. McCarthy et al. (1983) estimated a salvage
value of about $3 per usable tire for retreading, and the
Criteria Document reports that 17 million tires were rejected
because of weather checking in 1980. This information suggests
total annual damages of about $200 million.
Research Limitations
It is not clear how much expenditures for antiozonants
would decrease if ozone were reduced to background levels.
The change in economic costs associated with ozone-damaged
casing also is difficult to predict. First, the adjustment in
antiozonants is uncertain. And second, even if the changes in
both ozone and antiozonants were known, the associated change
in costs must be estimated.
Finally, it is unclear how many of the 17 million rejected
tires were due to ozone, and how reducing ozone would affect
future rejections.
2-9
-------
Lead
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants (#1))
Problem Characteristics
To preserve their effectiveness, pollutant control cata-
lysts in motor vehicles require unleaded gasoline. However,
because of lower prices, many people use leaded gasoline. Such
misfueling can prematurely depreciate these devices.
Research Approaches
In a Supplemental Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis
of a Ban on Lead in Gasoline (1985a), EPA attempted to determine
the damages to catalytic converters from using leaded versus
unleaded fuels. Using a replacement-cost methodology, EPA
tried to quantify the degree to which misfueling would take
place and the likely damages that would result.
Estimated Effects
Based on a projected misfueling rate of 20 percent of cur-
rent levels, EPA predicts that material damages to motor ve-
hicles from using lead in gasoline will be $148 million in 1988
(1986 dollars).
Research Limitations
It is difficult to predict the degree to which misfueling
is taking place.
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion (#7)
Problem Characteristics
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are emitted into the atmosphere
from a variety of human activities. These emissions mix in the
lower atmosphere and eventually migrate into the stratosphere,
where they are decomposed by ultraviolet radiation and release
chlorine atoms. These atoms interfere with the process for
forming ozone in the stratosphere, thus reducing the total
amount of stratospheric ozone and shifting the ozone distribution
to lower altitudes (NRC, 1976).
The two primary consequences of elevated concentrations of
CFCs in the stratosphere are:
0 increased levels of ultraviolet (UV-B) radiation at the
earth's surface, and
0 increased temperature and precipitation due to absorp-
tion and emission of infrared radiation.
2-10
-------
The first effect harms certain materials, such as polymers.
The second effect is additive to the climatic effects induced
by increases in carbon dioxide concentrations from fossil fuel
combustion and other human activities. We address the effects
of climate change in Chapter 4 of this report. In this section,
we consider only the effects associated with the increased
level of UV-B radiation.
In the last several months, several EPA-sponsored confer-
ences have focused on issues related to protecting the ozone
layer. However, the papers prepared for these conferences are
in draft form and are still being reviewed by peers. Thus, it
is only appropriate to cite completed studies at this time. One
such study is NRC (1982), which is a review and summary of avail-
able scientific data as of 1982. The remaining discussion in
this section is drawn from that reference.
Computer calculations indicated that maintaining the 1977
level of releases of CFCs would result in a net decrease of
total global ozone of five to nine percent, assuming no other
pertubations. However, in reality, other factors may contribute
positively or negatively to this depletion. For example, man-
made sources of nitrogen dioxide (NC>2) appear to be increasing
significantly due to agricultural practices and to solid waste
disposal sites. It is estimated that a 30 percent increase in
NC>2 concentrations could lead to a seven percent reduction of
global ozone, all else held constant. The overall effect of
joint consideration of NC>2 and CFC concentrations is believed not
to be additive. However, the complexity involved in modeling
atmospheric processes hinders the derivation of a single estimate
of the joint effect.
Carbon dioxide emissions are thought to mitigate the ad-
verse effects of CFCs and NC>2. Although increased carbon diox-
ide emissions (due to fossil fuel use) are expected to warm the
troposphere, they are expected to cool the lower stratosphere.
One result of this cooling is that the chemical processes in-
volving ozone depletion are less efficient at lower temperatures.
NRC (1982) reported that the reduction in ozone with CFC emis-
sions at 1977 levels would be only four to six percent if global
carbon dioxide concentrations were doubled.
Increases in UV-B radiation at the earth's surface are
expected to lead to accelerated weathering effects for a variety
of polymer products. The effects include yellowing, embrittle-
ment, chalking, and decreases in tensile strength. Manufacturers
of polymer products have recognized this problem and have
developed pigments and stabilizers to mitigate the damaging
effects.
2-11
-------
Research Approaches
In a recent study for EPA, Horst et al. (1986) estimated
the potential economic damages to selected polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) products, given a time-dependent scenario for ozone deple-
tion. They assumed that the producers of PVC products would
be able to increase the amount of stabilizers to preserve the
lifetime and quality of their products.
Estimates of economic damages were computed in a demand-
supply framework for three PVC products: siding, profiles
(including rainwater systems), and pipes and conduits. These
products were selected primarily because of their exposure
potential. Historical data were used to estimate an aggregate
derived demand curve. Model plant data were used to identify
long-run average costs. Welfare losses were computed as changes
in consumers' surplus brought about by changes in production
costs. A partial-equilibrium framework was assumed, with fixed
input prices for stabilizers.
Estimated Damages
For moderate estimates of ozone depletion, Horst et al.
estimated annual material damages from increased UV-B radiation
at approximately $49 million.
Research Limitations
This estimate should be interpreted with caution. It is
for the United States only, and covers only a portion of the
polymers potentially susceptible to increased UV-B radiation.
At a minimum, damages to all sensitive polymers in the United
States are expected to be four times greater than the $49
million damage estimate.
In addition, this estimate is taken from the Andrary study
(1986) which is in draft form and is still being reviewed. Finally,
the long-term forecasts required to complete the analysis are
subject to considerable uncertainty. A reasonable range for
the point estimates identified above would span at least an order
of magnitude.
Nitrogen Dioxide
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants (#1))
Problem Characteristics
Nitrogen oxides (NOX) are emitted primarily from the com-
bustion of fossil fuels. Nitric oxide (NO), a colorless and
odorless gas, is a major by-product of the combustion process.
Available evidence does not indicate that NO in the ambient air
is of direct concern for human health and welfare. However,
oxidation processes in the atmosphere transform NO into one of
2-12
-------
several other compounds, the most significant of which is nitro-
gen dioxide. Nitrogen dioxide is a reddish-brown gas that is
corrosive and highly oxidizing.
The mean annual average nitrogen dioxide concentrations
across the 14 National Air Monitoring Sites and a wide set of
177 sites were 0.031 ppm and 0.026 ppm, respectively, in 1983 (EPA,
1985a, pp. 3-29). Background levels for nitrogen dioxide range
between 0.0001 ppm and 0.005 ppm. In 1983, mobile and stationary
combustion of fossil fuels accounted for about 45 and 50 percent,
respectively, of man-made emissions. Motor vehicles represented
the largest share of mobile combustion emissions, and electric
utilities made up the largest proportion of stationary combustion
emissions.
Though very little quantitative information exists, nitro-
gen dioxide has been known to damage a variety of materials,
including textiles, plastics, and metals. Nitrogen dioxide
emissions significantly fade the dyes in many types of fabrics.
In cellulose acetate, anthraquinone dyes (especially blue dyes)
exposed to nitrogen dioxide show pronounced reddening. In cel-
lulosics--cotton and viscose rayon--fading from exposure to
nitrogen dioxide has been observed in both laboratory and field
studies (at concentrations present in the atmosphere). Again,
blue dyes are especially vulnerable. In nylon, acid dyes—
especially certain violets and blues--can show significant
fading. Polyester dyed with dispersed dyes is not affected by
nitrogen dioxide exposure, though permanent-press fabrics (a
blend of polyester and cotton) and textured polyester double
knits fade as the dye migrates to surface coatings and residuals.
Several types of fabrics demonstrate the potential for
yellowing when exposed to nitrogen dioxide: cellulose acetate
and polyurethane-segmented fibers, nylon, garments containing
rubberized cotton, fabrics treated with softeners, and nylon
treated with a permanent antistatic agent. Fabric degradation
results in reduced tensile strength and/or increased viscosity.
In industrial fabrics, which comprise the end use for 18 percent
of all fabrics, this effect can be costly and dangerous. A cham-
ber study has demonstrated that nylon becomes significantly
degraded when exposed to radiation at high temperatures with
nitrogen dioxide, as compared to exposure without nitrogen
dioxide (EPA, 1982d, pp. 13-19).
The effects of nitrogen dioxide on material strength is
of primary concern for plastics and elastomers. Although most
plastic materials show good chemical resistance to nitrogen
dioxide, laboratory trials have found that air pollution has-
tens their aging.
Polymers are susceptible to sulfur dioxide, nitrogen di-
oxide, and ozone. Linear polymers, such as nylon and polypro-
2-13
-------
pylene, are also known to be somewhat susceptible to nitrogen
dioxide.
Nitrogen dioxide is believed to accelerate the corrosion
of metals. However, most studies on metal corrosion have not
examined the role of nitrogen dioxide in isolation from other
causes of corrosion, such as sulfur dioxide or smog in general.
Research Approaches
Polymers were exposed to a combination of sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen dioxide, and ozone. These gases are the major compon-
ents of smog. The strength all of these materials decreased
as a result of their exposure. Butyl rubber, an elastomer, was
more affected by the sulfur and nitrogen dioxides than were the
other polymers. However, ozone had the most pronounced effect
on the rubber.
Estimated Damages
Based on a 1973 status report, the EPA Criteria Document
for Nitrogen Dioxide estimated the cost of fading as a result
of exposure to NOX emissions to be $280 million (EPA, 1982d,
pp. 13-16). Although there was little change in NOX emissions
between 1973 and 1983 (EPA 1975b, 1985b), production technology
and inventory may have changed during that period.
SUMMARY
Pollution damages materials in a number ways. The major
damages documented in this chapter stem from air pollution.
Particulate matter is estimated to cause annual damages of $15.5
billion for households and $3.2 billion for the manufacturing
sector of the economy. Acid precipitation causes $2.8 billion
per year in damages, in addition to damages to cultural and
other irreplaceable artifacts that cannot be readily valued.
Sulfur dioxide is associated with a further $1.7 billion in
material damages each year.
A number of minor categories of material damages are
assessed in this chapter. Corrosive water leaches lead in
municipal water systems, resulting in estimated damages of $0.5
billion annually. Ambient ozone is projected to cause moderate
annual material damages, particularly to paints and elastomers.
Damages from nitrogen dioxide are roughly $0.3 billion per year
from the fading of fabrics, in addition to unquantified damages
to other materials. Using leaded gasoline in vehicles requiring
unleaded fuel results in annual damages of roughly $0.1 billion.
Finally, stratospheric ozone depletion is projected to cause
moderate to significant material damages annually.
2-14
-------
Chapter 3
Reduced Recreational Opportunities
INTRODUCTION
Environmental pollution affects many types of recreational
activities, such as picnicking, playing tennis, and camping.
Because only limited data are available on the values of out-
door recreation and how environmental pollution changes these
values, this chapter only covers the effects of water pollution
on swimming, fishing, and boating, and the effects of air pollu-
tion on sportfihing and hunting and pesticide use on hunting.
Table 3-1 lists the five specific environmental problems
that reduce these recreational opportunities, and ranks them
according to the severity of the harm they cause. Because of
the particular ranking method used, the damages to the individual
recreational categories (e.g., swimming versus sport fishing)
cannot be delineated.
This chapter discusses these environmental problems,
estimates the monetary damages they cause, and details how these
estimates were developed and the limitations behind them.
MAJOR PROBLEMS
The major environmental problems that reduce recreational
opportunities are Discharges from Direct and Indirect Point
Sources to Surface Waters (#9, #10); Discharges from Nonpoint
Sources to Surface Waters (#11); and To Estuaries, Coastal
Waters, and Oceans from All Sources (#13). Because problems
#9, #10, and #11 all affect surface waters, this chapter discus-
ses them in one section.
Discharges from Direct and Indirect Point Sources
(#9, #10) and Nonpoint Sources (#11) to Surface Waters
Problem Characteristics
Discharges from industrial (direct-point) and municipal
(indirect-point) sources of pollution and from the runoff of pesti-
cides, acid mine drainage, and fertilizers from the land (non-
point sources) can seriously limit water-oriented recreational
activities. Currently, a substantial portion of the nation's
lakes and streams are too degraded to support fishing, boating,
and swimming. Based on state assessments of water quality, it
is estimated that the quality of 1.4 million surface acres of
streams and 4.3 million surface acres of lakes is substandard.
3-1
-------
Table 3-1
Ranking of Environmental Problems
That Cause Recreational Damages
(billions of 1986 $)
Reduced Reduced Reduced Reduced
Environmental Swimming Boating Fishing Hunting
Problems Activities Activities Activities Activities
Major Problems
Discharges from <•
Nonpoint Sources
to Surface Waters
Discharges from <•
Indirect Point
Sources to
Surface Waters
3.7
2.5
Discharges from <•
Direct Point
Sources to
Surface Waters
To Coastal Waters, <-
Estuaries, and
Oceans from
All Sources
Minor Problems
Criteria Air
Pollutants
Other Pesticide Risks
0.8
XS*
L/M
* Effects to estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans are largely es-
timated by source categories (i.e., nonpoint source discharges),
Key to Effects; Letter codes correspond to order-of-magnitude
ranges for annual effects.
XS = Extremely Significant: damages of $1 billion or more.
S = Significant: damages of $100 million-$999 million.
M = Moderate: damages of $10 million-$99 million.
L = Low: damages of $1 million-$9 million.
-- = N/A or near 0: damages of $0 to several million dollars.
? = Uncertain: potentially high damages, but subject to
great uncertainty.
3-2
-------
Research Approaches
The estimated welfare losses from these enviromental prob-
lems are based on people's willingness to pay for successive
improvements in surface water quality that would make waters
suitable for boating, swimming, and fishing. Here, willingness
to pay includes not only the value participants of water-oriented
recreation place upon these improvements, but also the value non-
users place on them for their aesthetic value, for the option of
using them in the future, or for other reasons. (Nonuser values
for all environmental media are also addressed in Chapter 6 of
this report.)
To document these welfare values, we primarily relied on
Mitchell and Carson (1984). Their study estimated welfare
values attributable to successive levels of improvement to
these surface waters based upon a contingent-valuation survey.
The study then allocated these values to different sources of
pollution.
We assumed those values would be realized from improving
lakes and streams that currently do not fully support their
designated uses (such as fishing or swimming). In EPA surveys,
such waters are referred to either as "not supporting" or as
only "partially supporting" their designated uses.
The EPA surveys also report on the proportion of stream
miles and lake surface acres primarily affected by particular
sources of pollution. We used these data to allocate the
values from water quality improvement to the various sources.
Estimated Damages
The estimates from the Mitchell and Carson study appear in
Table 3-2. It presents the user and nonuser values of surface
waters for different levels of improvement in water quality.
The table shows (Column 1) the value to each household for these
successive improvements and (Column 2) the value to the nation
as a whole. The survey and the study allow for two different
interpretations about where we are now with respect to water
quality and, hence, what potential benefits remain from further
improvement.
One interpretation is that respondents regard "boatable"
as referring to a situation where water quality is at least
boatable, although the quality of many fresh water bodies is
higher, and that this refers to the current level of water
quality. Based upon this assumption, the potential remaining
reductions in welfare losses from successive improvements in
water quality to fishable and swimmable levels would be $13.0
billion per year, as shown in Column 3.
3-3
-------
Table 3-2
Values of Various Levels of Water Quality
Upgrades in
Water Quality
Increment to beatable
from zero base
To (99%) fishable
from boatable
To swimmable from
fishable
Total
(1)
Value Per
Household
($/year)
97
73
82
252
(2) (3)
(4)
National Recreational Values
(billions 1986 $/yr)
Overall
8.2
6.2
6.8
21.2
From Present
High Est . Low Est.
6.2
6.8
13.0
0.6
1.7
2.3
Another interpretation is that respondents regard the water
quality levels as referring to a hypothetical situation in which
water quality is predominately at a boatable level, or predomi-
nately fishable, etc. Since we already are a good part of the
way toward having fishable and swimmable water, a large part of
the values that would come from further water quality improve-
ments in Column 3 have already been achieved. As a result, the
remaining potential values would be much less, as shown in Col-
umn 4.
Thus, in a side investigation, Mitchell and Carson estima-
ted that the value of going from a situation in which 95 percent
of the water is fishable to the practical limit of 99 percent
fishable would be only eight percent of the fishable increment
shown in Table 3-2, or $0.6 billion per year. Since 95 percent
fishable is a good description of the current water quality situa-
tion, the latter dollar figure is an estimate of remaining poten-
tial benefits.
Reasoning similarly, the study found that 70-80 percent of
the water classified as potentially swimmable is already swim-
mable. Assuming 75 percent of the swimmable values shown are
already being enjoyed, the remaining potential values from
improving water quality for swimmability were estimated to be
$1.7 billion per year.
3-4
-------
The low estimate of remaining gains from providing fishable,
swimmable water is, therefore, the sum of the last two estimates
or $2.3 billion per year. The high estimate is $13.0 billion,
and the mid-range estimate, used in Table 3-3, is $7.7 billion.
Table 3-3 shows the results from the second step of our
analysis. We allocated the potential benefits of water quality
improvements among the various sources of pollution, using two
sets of data. The first is an estimate of lake surface acres
and stream miles not fully supporting their designated uses.
The designated uses for most bodies of surface water are swim-
ming and fishing (EPA, National Water Quality Inventory, 1985).
We converted stream miles to surface acres to get a single mea-
sure for the two kinds of surface water. We estimated that 1.4
million surface acres of streams and 4.3 million surface acres
of lakes do not fully support their designated uses—that is,
they are substandard.
The second data set from the same source is a survey of the
causes of water quality problems. For streams and lakes, we
estimated the proportion of substandard water attributable to
various sources (EPA, National Water Quality Inventory, 1985).
From these data sets, we calculated the first column of figures
in Table 3-3 and then used these figures to allocate the total
benefit estimate attributable to various sources.
The greatest losses are from nonpoint sources ($3.7 billion
per year), followed by municipal point sources ($2.5 billion per
year), and industrial point sources ($0.8 billion per year).
These estimates include both recreational and nonuser values.
The mid-range assumption regarding potential values implies
that water quality improvements could increase water-related
values 56 percent over what they are now. Currently, these
values are roughly $13.6 billion. With successive improvements
in water quality, they could rise to $21.3 billion. Based on
the low and high estimates of remaining welfare values, the
remaining values represent an increase over current water-related
levels of from 12 to 160 percent.
In an assessment by Freeman (1982), recreational and non-
user values covered by the estimates in Table 3-3 account for
60 percent of the gains from cleaning up fresh water. The
remaining gains would come from diversion uses--e.g., drinking
water.
Research Limitations
Calculating welfare losses necessitates making a number
of assumptions. For example, EPA surveys assessed only a por-
tion of the total surface waters. To obtain a national esti-
mate of the surface waters not supporting designated uses, we
3-5
-------
Table 3-3
Proportion of Substandard Surface Waters
Primarily Affected by Specific Sources*
Sources of Pollution
% of Surface Area
Primarily Affected
by Indicated Source
Welfare Losses
(billions of
1986 $/yr)
Point Sources
Industrial Point
Sources
Municipal Point
Sources
Nonpoint Sources
Natural Sources
Other Sources
Total
42.5
10.3
32.3
48.8
3.5
5.2
100.0
3.2
0.8
2.5
3. 7
0.3
0.4
7.7
* Numbers may not add because of rounding.
extrapolated the figures from the sampled portion of surface
waters to a national figure. It is unclear whether the surface
waters considered in the sample are representative of the qual-
ity of the nation's waters in terms of size and water quality.
The assumption here is that the surveys assessed the larger
streams and that those not assessed are meeting designated uses.
EPA generally presents water quality assessments in terms
of stream miles for streams and surface acres for lakes. To
assess welfare losses by specific pollution categories, we con-
verted stream miles to surface acres. Analysis of aggregate
data on fishing activity on lakes versus streams suggests that
surface acres are a reasonable measure of fishable water.
A last limitation stems from the survey design of the
Mitchell and Carson study itself. Based upon the set of sur-
vey questions, it is unclear as to whether respondents were
asked to value hypothetical improvements assuming all fresh
waters were at specific states of water quality (e.g., from
3-6
-------
swimmable to fishable) or just improvements in that subset of
fresh-water bodies that are actually at certain levels of
water quality (e.g., only water bodies that are swimmable to
fishable). As a result, we could construct only a broad range
of welfare loss estimates.
To Estuaries, Coastal Waters, and
Oceans from All Sources (#13)
Problem Characteristics
Deteriorating water quality in estuaries, coastal waters,
and oceans threatens swimming, boating, and sportfishing oppor-
tunities. Pollution of near coastal waters may also affect the
coastal tourist industry (including waterfront development),
which has experienced rapid growth in recent years.
Research Approaches
EPA's National Estuary Program has designated seven estua-
rine areas for water quality improvements. These areas are the
Cheaspeake Bay in Maryland, Long Island Sound, Albemarle and
Pamlico Sounds in North Carolina, San Francisco Bay, Buzzards
Bay in Massachusetts, and Puget Sound in Washington.
The methodological approaches for estimating the recrea-
tional losses to these waters from pollution are based on a
preliminary analysis of values in the Long Island Sound (Draft
EPA report, 1985). Various estimation methods were applied
in this analysis. Values were measured in terms of changes in
willingness to pay, and a combination of techniques was used to
measure the value of recreational use (e.g., travel costs, con-
tingent valuation, and unit-day-value).
To estimate the values that recreational users place on
water quality, the Long Island Sound analysis surveyed people
living near the Sound. They were asked to reveal the values
they placed on being able to use the Sound for recreation. The
study added the total values, divided the sum by the number of
people surveyed, and then multiplied the individual value times
the number of people living in the area. For the other six
selected estuaries, the average individual value calculated from
the Long Island Sound study was multiplied by the total popula-
tions living in their surrounding counties.
Estimated Damages
As Table 3-4 shows, water quality improvements are estima-
ted to reduce recreational damages in the seven estuaries by
anywhere from $152 million to $473 million annually. These
values were the sum of estimates for each of the estuaries.
3-7
-------
This range includes the major recreational uses of beach swim-
ming, boating, and sportfishing.
Table 3-4
Estimates of the Recreational Values
of Selected Estuaries
Population of
Estuaries Surrounding Counties Annual Values
(000) (millions of 1986 $)
Long Island Sound
Buzzards Bay
Narragansett Bay
Albemarle Sound
Pamlico Sound
San Francisco Bay
Puget Sound
Chesapeake Bay
5,483
600
947
121
111
3,966
2,149
1,519
56
6
9
1
1
41
23
15
- 174
- 19
- 30
- 4
- 3
- 126
- 69
- 48
Total 14,896 152 - 473
Research Limitations
In addition to the specific dollar estimates for estuaries,
it is important to consider the recreational values associated
with near coastal waters (tidal shorelines). It is difficult
to estimate the incremental values that could accrue as a result
of the improvement in the quality of near coastal waters, even
though trends indicate that protection is increasingly important
(e.g., population growth in the shoreline regions of the country
and degradation is resulting from a variety of sources). A U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service survey estimated that the gains to recreational
fishing from improved water quality exceeded $2 billion in 1985.
That estimate did include the substantial values associated with
fishing expenditures. For purposes of this chapter, the recrea-
tional estimates for estuaries and near coastal waters are limited
to the seven bodies of water in the National Estuary Program.
The major limitation to the estuary estimates is that they
are only simple extrapolations of Long Island Sound damages to
other regions covered by the National Estuary Program. Certain
assumptions of the similarity across estuaries underlie the
use of the estimates presented in that study, such as:
3-8
-------
0 the economic activities that take place (fishing and
recreational aspects);
0 the species and distribution of shellfish and other fish;
0 the amount of beach swimming area relative to the amount
of shoreline;
0 the level of water quality deterioration and degree of
future cleanup and control;
0 the manner in which economic activities are affected by
changes in water quality; and
0 the economic activities that could benefit from improved
water quality.
EPA does not have an aggregate estimate of welfare losses
to all estuaries and coastal waters. We thought that if a
national figure were calculated, annual damages would fall in
the extremely significant category.
MINOR PROBLEMS
We ranked only two environmental problems that affect
recreational opportunities as minor: the impact of Acid Precipi-
tation on recreational hunting activities and sportfishing, and
Pesticide use on hunting.
Acid Precipitation
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants (#1)
Problem Characteristics
Acid preciptation can lead to declines in fish populations,
reducing sportfishing opportunities. In addition, it can disrupt
forest ecosystems, changing the diversity of forest species, reduc-
ing animal populations, and thus limiting hunting opportunities.
Research Approaches
Quantitative estimates of damages from reduced sportfishing
from acid precipitation have been calculated using travel-cost
and participation models for lakes in the Adirondack region
(Baker and Harvey, 1984). This region has been one of the
areas in the United States most affected by acid precipitation.
With the participation model, estimates of changes in fish
catches were linked to changes in total fishing days, and
changes in fishing days were multiplied by the value of each
fishing day to determine total damages. A fishing day was valued
at $30, based upon a previous study by Vaughn and Russell (1982).
3-9
-------
With the travel-cost method, the Adirondack region was
divided into 24 sites. Site-specific declines in fish popula-
tions were used to assess total damages.
Estimated Damages
Both models estimated damages at between $3 million and
$6 million annually.
Research Limitations
A number of caveats accompany the sportfishing analyses.
First, these damage estimates are for the Adirondack lakes only
and do not include streams. Second, several of the sites were
excluded from the travel-cost analysis due to data problems and
third, the dose-response relationships underpinning these analyses
are uncertain. No national estimate of damages was available.
The effects of acid precipitation on hunting have not yet
been estimated quantitatively. A large variation in damages can
be expected, depending on the hunting area and the extent of the
change in the density of forest species.
Other Pesticide Risks (#27)
Problem Characteristics
A number of pesticides pose risks for avian wildlife,
thereby limiting hunting activities. For example, diazinon is
particularly toxic to waterfowl. Duck populations are at
all-time lows, with pesticides probably contributing to their
declining numbers.
Research Limitations
No estimate of damages was available. No attempt has been
made to calculate losses of wildlife from exposure to pesticides.
SUMMARY
Most of the damages to recreational opportunities result
from water pollution. Major problems include Discharges from
Nonpoint Sources and from Indirect and Direct Point Sources
to Surface Waters, and To Estuaries, Coastal Waters and Oceans
from All Sources. Diminished sportfishing and hunting activities
from Acid Precipitation and Pesticides are listed as minor problems.
3-10
-------
Chapter 4
Environmental Damage to Natural Resources
INTRODUCTION
This chapter examines five types of natural resources that
can suffer losses from environmental pollution. These are crops,
livestock, forests, commercial fisheries, and agricultural land.
The first four resources are sources of foods or raw mater-
ials for useful products. The fifth is a productive asset. In
this chapter, natural resources are valued as commercial commod-
ities. Damage estimates are based on losses of commerical pro-
duction, not on aesthetic or recreational factors (which are
addressed in other chapters in this report).
An overall summary and ranking of the effects of environ-
mental pollution on natural resources is presented in Table 4-1.
It shows that natural resources are most susceptible to atmos-
pheric ozone buildup, acid precipitation, stratospheric ozone
depletion, pollution of surface water from nonpoint sources,
and global warming. Significant effects on natural resources
exist also in the case of potential accidents involving biotech-
nology. Many other environmental problems have adverse effects
on natural resources at moderate to low levels.
This chapter first discusses the difficulties we ran into in
ranking the environmental problems that affect natural resources.
It then presents the ranking of environmental problems, explaining
why those problems were selected and identified as major and minor
problems. Finally, the chapter looks at each problem individually
and—then summarizes our findings on damages to natural resources.
DIFFICULTIES IN ASSESSING DAMAGES TO NATURAL RESOURCES
In attempting to assess the damages to natural resources
from environmental pollution, our major concern was the limited
amount of guantitative information available for this ranking
exercise. Data from formal studies are available for only five
of the 31 environmental problem areas outlined in this project
(see Table 4-2). The studies have a number of methodological
problems, and they vary in quality. Some of the estimates
for welfare damages are for current years (the 1980s), while
others, such as those for global warming, are for the distant
future (a century from now).
4-1
-------
Table 4-1
Ranking of Environmental Problems That Affect Natural Resources
(billions of 1986 $)
Damages
Damages Damages Damages Damages to
Rank Environmental to to to to Agric.
Problems Crops Livestock Forests Fisheries Land
Major Problems
1 Criteria Air Pollutants XS/S — M
(Atmospheric Ozone)
2 Criteria Air Pollutants M — S L
(Acid Precipitation)
3 Stratospheric Ozone Depl. XS M/S MS
4 Nonpoint Source Discharges
to Surface Waters S — — — M
5 C02/Global Warming M/S — ? — S
6 Biotechnology ? ? ?
Minor Problems
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
To Estuaries, Coastal Waters
and Oceans from All Sources
To Wetlands from All Sources
Hazardous/Toxic Air Poll.
Direct Point-Source Dis-
charges to Surface Waters
Indir. Point-Source Dis-
charges to Surface Waters
Other Criteria Air Poll.
Mining Waste
Acciden. Releases of Toxics
Accidental Oil Spills
Active Haz. Waste Sites
Inactive Haz. Waste Sites
Contaminated Sludge
Other Pesticide Risks
Other Ground Water Contam.
__
— —
L/M
—
—
L
—
— —
—
L
i-i — —
— —
L
L
M/S
M
L
L/M
L/M
L
L
L
L
— —
— —
L
— —
— • — • _ _
—
—
L/M
—
—
—
—
—
—
L
L
—
—
"™ "™
Key to Effects; Letter codes correspond to order-of-magnitude ranges for
annual effects.
XS = Extremely Significant: damages of $1 billion or more.
S = Significant: damages of $100 million-$999 million.
M = Moderate: damages of $10 million-$99 million.
L = Low: damages of $1 million-$9 million.
— = N/A or near 0: damages of $0 to several million dollars.
?) = Uncertain: potentially high damages, but subject to great uncertainty,
4-2
-------
TABLE 4-2
Summary of Quantitative Estimates
From Available Studies
Environmental
Problems
Resource
Affected
Estimated
Annual Losses
(millions of
1986$)
Comments
Atmospheric Ozone Crops
First Estimate
Second Estimate Crops
Acid Precipitation Forests
First Estimate
Second Estimate Forests
Discharges from Crops
Nonpoint Sources
to Surface Waters
CC-2/Global Warming Crops
1,000 Losses compared with a 0.09
ppm standard (Kopp et al. 1985).
800-3,000 Based on range of 10 to 40 per-
cent ozone reduction (ERL 1984).
614 Based on assumption of 5 percent
growth impairment (Crocker et al.
1985).
348-726 Based on hypothetical radial
growth decrements of 10, 15, and
20 percent (Callaway et al. 1985).
260 a_/ Losses for Colorado River Basin
(only) in year 2000, based on es-
timated $610,000/yr loss per one
mg/1 rise in salinity (1986 $).
To Estuaries,
Coastal Waters,
and Oceans
from All Sources
Other Criteria Air
Pollutants
66 a/
(4) a/
Forests (2,720) a/
Fisheries (162) a/
Fisheries 5.5 - 8.3
Crops
0.5:
1.2:
2.1:
National corn crop loss in 100 yrs
Cotton crop gain in 100 years.
Forest yield gain in 100 years.
Fishery yield gain in 100 years.
Direct commercial fishing losses.
Estimates are for potential bene-
fits of the National Estuary Pro-
gram at seven major bays and sound,'
extrapolated from a L.I. Sound
Study.
Oats Point estimates for effects of
Wheat SO2 on crops. Maximum estimates
Soy- are equal to twice the point
beans estimates (Mathtech 1985). Nat-
ional effects on corn, cotton,
and other major crops not included
ji/ Nondiscounted estimate. Present-value estimate would be considerably
lower.
4-3
-------
Other problems with the set of studies included:
0 uncertainty or incomplete knowledge about the effects
of pollutants at various concentrations upon plant and
animal species under both actual and potential conditions;
0 extrapolation of data to the national level, including
the basis for using case study data (for particular
species or localities) to represent larger aggregates/-
also, data samples are small;
0 valuation complexities involving the effects of govern-
ment subsidies; estimates of welfare losses are often
based on distorted prices, rather than on the prices
that would result in a free market;
0 attribution of adverse effects to particular sources,
when several problems are involved simultaneously; esti-
mation of net damages when a certain problem (e.g., glo-
bal warming) simultaneously inhibits the growth of some
species and enhances the growth of others; and
0 global warming and stratospheric ozone depletion are likely
to interact to change weather patterns in the future, so
these problems cannot be assessed alone.
METHOD USED TO RANK ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
Given the limited information about risks to natural resources,
we collected information on the current commercial value of the
five natural resources. Table 4-3 presents these values. For
example, the total income to farmers from the sale of all farm
crops produced in the United States averaged $70.7 billion per
year from 1980 to 1984. As with the figures for the other
natural resources in the table, this figure varies with yearly
market prices (or support prices).
We used this information to construct plausible "upper
bounds" of the welfare risks to natural resources. For instance,
if we thought that a one percent decline in a natural resource's
value were possible from exposure to an environmental pollutant,
then we could calculate the welfare loss likely if this loss
occurred. Thus, as Table 4-3 shows, for crops, livestock,
commercial fishing, and forest products, a one percent decline
would mean losses of $707 million, $699 million, $24 million,
and $84 million, respectively.
Evaluation of welfare losses to many agricultural commodities
is especially complex because most of their prices are not set
in a free market. The federal government subsidizes the agri-
cultural sector (crops and livestock products) through a large
4-4
-------
Table 4-3
Commercial Value of Existing Natural Resources
Commercial Value
Resource (billions of 1986 $)
Crops1
Livestock2
Commercial Fishing-^
Forest Products^
Farm Land^
70.7
69.9
2.4
8.4
683.5
Value Per One Percent
(millions of 1986 $)
707
699
24
84
6,835
Note: Includes only resources in the United States.
1 U.S. farm revenues, annual average from 1980 to 1984. In addi-
tion to the value shown, there were $4.9 billion per year of
federal payments to farmers during the same period.
2 U.S. livestock, poultry, and dairy production, annual average
from 1980 to 1984.
3 U.S. domestic commercial fish and seafood landings, annual
average from 1980 to 1985.
4 Softwood and hardwood sales valued at their average prices per
board foot, annual average from 1980 to 1983.
5 Book value of farm land, excluding buildings, average value
from 1980 to 1985.
Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Sta-
tistical Abstract of the United States 1986; U.S. Department of
Commerce, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration,
Fisheries of the United States, 1985.
4-5
-------
number of programs. Major crops, such as corn, wheat, rice,
cotton, and (to a lesser degree) soybeans, have support
programs that tyoically make payments available to farmers to
set aside acreage .and offer, floor p.rices.for..production_from
acreage that is participating in the government's programs.
Subsidies also exist in the form of investments made in irriga-
tion and transportation facilities and government financing of
stocks of surplus commodities and distribution programs (food
stamps, school lunches, etc.). Thus, it is extremely difficult
to separate out the value of subsidies from farm incomes. Farm
support programs have also changed every few years, in effect
changing the rules that farmers follow and altering investment
planning in the agriculture sector.
Federal subsidies also play a significant role in the rev-
enues and earnings from livestock products. Feed grains, such
as corn, are affected by federal support programs, and the
price of milk is set under federal purchase programs.
Unlike the other types of resources, farm land is an asset,
rather than a product. Its value fluctuates in part with farm
profitability. This summary identifies damages to farm land
only when agricultural land would be critically damaged (removed
from production or downgraded in use). Since farm land is a
capital asset, its value is derived from the commodities grown
on it and fluctuates with the profitability of those commodities.
Conseguently, care has been taken to prevent double counting the
value of farm land and crop or livestock values.
One final important caveat for estimating the effects of
pollution on natural resources is that only U.S. resources have
been valued here. In the case of global problems—particularly
global warming and stratosphere ozone depletion—adverse effects
could occur in other countries, increasing the losses substantially,
MAJOR PROBLEMS
The environmental problems that cause major damage to natural
resources are Atmospheric Ozone, Stratospheric Ozone Depletion,
Discharges from Nonpoint Sources to Surface Waters, CO2 and
Global Warming, and Biotechnology.
Atmospheric Ozone (#1)
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants)
Problem Characteristics
Ozone (03) is formed by a series of chemical reactions in-
volving volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOX),
atmospheric oxygen, and sunlight. Ozone decreases the photosyn-
thetic efficiency of vegetation, which can lead to a reduction
in agricultural crop and forestry yields.
4-6
-------
The major sources of NOX emissions are fuel combustion (50
percent of total emissions) and motor vehicles (45 percent).
VOCs are emitted mainly by industrial processes (38 percent) and
motor vehicles (36 percent). Atmospheric levels of ozone aver-
aged 0.146 parts per million (ppm) at the National Air Moni-
toring Sites. (The second highest daily maximum one-hour ozone
concentration was used to construct this average.)
Research Approaches
Both ambient oxidant and controlled chamber studies have
examined the adverse effects of ozone on federal crop varieties.
Crop- and region-specific models have been developed to predict
damages to agricultural crops, based upon 1978 crop distributions,
ozone concentrations, and crop prices.
Estimated Damages
One study reported that ozone damages crops at an estimated
rate of one billion dollars per year, compared with a potential
ozone standard of 0.09 ppm (Kopp et al., 1985). Another study
(ERL, 1984) estimated that a ten percent reduction from current
ambient ozone levels would reduce annual crop damages by $0.8
billion, while a 40 percent reduction would reduce them by
$3.0 billion. This study examined corn, soybeans, wheat,
cotton, sorghum, and barley, but appraised crop reductions at
market prices in 1980. Ozone is also reported to cause over
one million dollars in damages to forests each year, which may
be a low estimate (Mathtech, 1986).
Research Limitations
The damages estimated in the Kopp et al. study are measured
from a reduction in ozone from 0.12 ppm to 0.09 ppm. Since natural
background levels of ozone range from 0.05 to 0.06 ppm, this
estimate by Kopp et al. understated total damages to crops from
exposure to ozone. Crop damages are based on sales prices,
which may reflect subsidized, rather than market, prices for
some major crops.
Acid Precipitation (#1)
(Part of Criteria Air Pollutants)
Problem Characteristics
The principal sources of acid precipitation are coal-fired
utilities and industrial boilers. Acid precipitation gradually
turns soil and lakes acidic, impairing tree, plant, and animal
growth. The Northeast has been especially affected, with pH
levels in many areas decreasing from 5.6 to levels of 4.0 to
4-7
-------
4.5 (the lower the pH level, the hiqher the acidity). Acid
precipitation may also accelerate nutrient leaching in soils.
Research Approaches
Current knowledge of the effects of acid precipitation
on terrestrial systems is based in part on soil research and
on studies of such species as red spruce and balsam fir in the
Northeast. Models are available for estimating economic effects.
One such model is the Timber Assessment Market Model (TAMM).
The TAMM makes exogenous assumptions about timber supply changes
and calculates the effects that will occur in lumber markets,
particularly changes of lumber prices.
Estimated Damages
The TAMM estimates national damages to trees in the range
of $348 million to $726 million per year, using hypothetical
radial growth decrements of 10, 15, and 20 percent (Callaway
et al. , 1985). A study by Crocker et al. (1985) estimates timber
losses at $614 million annually, based on an assumption that
growth is reduced by five percent. Actual reductions in growth
may be below these levels, implying an overestimation of damages.
R e s e a r c h L i m i t at ions
Current knowledge of the effects of acid precipitation is
limited with respect to effects across a range of acidity levels,
reactions of various species, and full soil reaction mechanisms.
(Information on the losses of sportfish from acid precipition
is addressed in Chapter 3). The assumptions about growth
impairment, used in the above studies, are hypothetical or
sensitivity assumptions, rather than scientifically derived
estimates.
At present, there are some data on the effects of acid preci-
pitation on individual coniferous trees. However, there are very
little data on the effects of acid precipitation on stands (groups)
of trees, which are believed to react differently from individual
trees. Hence, the fact that growth decrements have been modeled
up to the point of a 20 percent impairment is not a basis for
concluding that this level of reduction will actually take place.
The TAMM is a demand- and market-oriented model that
considers the price effects of exogenous changes in supply.
Its accuracy is limited by the accuracy of knowledge about growth
reductions caused by air pollutants.
Finally, damages outside the United States are not included,
though parts of Canada and Mexico are also influenced by U.S.
air emissions.
4-8
-------
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion (#7)
Problem Characteristics
The stratospheric ozone layer shields the earth's surface
from ultraviolet (UV-B) radiation. Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)
releases from stationary sources can significantly reduce the
ozone layer.
In 1978, a 20 percent reduction in stratospheric ozone
was projected over the next 50 years, if pre-1978 CFC emission
rates were to continue. This ozone reduction would have allowed
a 40 percent increase in UV-B radiation reaching the earth's
surface. In response to such projections, a number of industrial
countries, including the United States have moderated their
use of CFCs since 1978. Consequently, this projection probably
substantially overestimates likely increases in UV-B radiation.
Research Approaches
Over 200 species and varieties of crops, plants, and trees
have been screened for their responsiveness to increased UV-B
radiation. Plants have been exposed to UV-B light from artifi-
cial sources in plant growth chambers. Aquatic organisms have
also been studied under artificial UV-B light in tanks.
Estimated Damages
Nearly two-thirds of all plants tested show some sensitivity
to UV-B radiation. Pea, bean, squash, melon, and cabbage
varieties are especially sensitive.
Some aquatic species currently are exposed to as much UV-B
radiation as they can tolerate. In a study of anchovies, a 20
percent increase in UV-B radiation over 15 days killed all lar-
vae within a ten-meter mixed layer in April and August. If
phytoplankton move to avoid a ten percent increase in UV-B, they
may also reduce by 2.5 to 5.0 percent their exposure to photo-
synthetically active radiation on which they depend. Hence,
UV-B radiation from ozone depletion could substantially reduce
the supply of fish in coastal and ocean fishing grounds.
UV-B radiation also threatens forests. Some plant varie-
ties are particularly susceptible to higher UV-B stresses. An
increase in UV-B radiation could cause ecological changes in
current plant balances. While the consequences of these changes
are unknown, the damages would be sizable, if harvestable tree
species were at a disadvantage.
UV-B radiation may also impair animal growth. However,
potential damages are not known with any degree of certainty.
4-9
-------
Research Limitations
Relatively little is known at present about the effects
of stratospheric ozone depletion. Studies are not available
to comprehensively capture the damages for all categories of
resources. Current information primarily comes from laboratory
testSr which may be very different from natural conditions. The
adaptive behavior of plants and animals also is unknown, and
this exercise has assumed it to be nonexistent.
Damages outside the United States are not included, though
ozone depletion has worldwide impacts. Finally, it is important
to keep in mind that most of the damages forecasted from this
environmental problem are likely to take place in the distant
future.
Discharges from Nonpoint Sources to Surface Waters (#11)
Problem Characteristics
When water is used for irrigation, a large portion is lost
through evaporation and transpiration from the soil or plants.
As a result, dissolved salts and metals are concentrated in the
remaining drainage water. The drainage water can also leach
additional salts from the soil. In addition, heavy rainfall
can erode topsoil, carrying away water-soluble pesticides and
pesticides that bind to soil particles. The contaminated
drainage water travels to surface waters that, when used for
irrigation, damage crop production.
Research Approaches
Agricultrual damages are estimated using experimental re-
sults of the effect of salinity on crop productivity.
Estimated Damages
Damage to crops from increased salinity has been extensively
studied and is a relatively certain outcome of current irriga-
tion practices. Many of the crop damages from salinity would
occur in the Colorado River Basin. The Bureau of Reclamation
estimates that these damages would amount to $610,000 per year
per additional milligram/liter (mg/1) of salinity above a level
of 800 mg/1, measured at the end of the Colorado Basin at
Imperial Dam.
In the absence of control measures, salinity has been pro-
jected to increase to 1,200 mg/1 by the year 2000, implying
damages of $260 million 23 years from now. (Much smaller dam-
ages have also been identified for birds at a reservoir in Cali-
fornia, where evaporation ponds have accumulated high concentra-
tions of selenium and other toxic pollutants.) If salinity is
4-10
-------
severe, some agricultural lands may suffer long-term losses in
their ability to produce agricultural commodities.
Research Limitations
The damages from salination of lands outside the Colorado
River Basin (such as parts of California) are not included in
the above estimate. Also, no attempt has been made to estimate
the welfare costs to crops from pesticide runoff.
CO? and Global Warming (#8)
Problem Characteristics
Carbon dioxide (CC>2) in the atmosphere traps solar radia-
tion, causing the earth's atmosphere to gradually grow warmer.
Combustion of fossil fuels is increasing the rate of CC>2 forma-
tion, and tropical forests that convert CC>2 to oxygen are dis-
appearing as a result of heavy development. Current rates of
fossil fuel combustion could lead to a two degree centigrade
(2°C) increase in global temperatures over the next hundred years.
The long-term conseguences of higher temperatures may involve
the melting of polar ice, leading to a submersion of coastal
lowlands, to shifts in agricultural crop-growing areas, and to
decreased productivity for some harvestable plant species.
Estimated Damages
In one hundred years, a 2°C increase in temperature could
reduce national corn production by $66 million annually, though
cotton yields would increase by $4 million per year (in a cen-
tury). Possible gains for forestry yields ($2,720 million per
year in a century) and fisheries ($162 million per year in a
century) could offset crop losses. The unguantified effects
of the flooding of agricultural lands could result in huge
reductions in agricultural commodities far into the future.
Research Limitations
No attempt has been made to separate out the welfare gains
from losses as a result of global warming. This is a particu-
larly important issue for this environmental problem, since global
warming causes both increases and decreases in yields of agricultural
commodities and forestry products.
The present extent of scientific understanding of this
problem is limited. Quantitative estimates are not available
for losses of agricultural lands from sea level rise, and effects
on crops other than cotton and corn have not been studied. Fin-
ally, damages outside the United States have not been included.
4-11
-------
Biotechnology (#29)
Problem Characteristics
Biotechnology will accelerate the introduction of genetic
change. Generally, genetically engineered microorganisms are
not expected to survive long in conditions other than those for
which they were designed. However, there is a possibility that
some of the organisms will be able to survive, reproduce, and
damage commercial crops or livestock. Given the current system
of monoculture, wherein U.S. farms are specialized in producing
a small number of crop varieties, a biological change could rap-
idly cause serious damage before countermeasures could be devel-
oped. The situation is somewhat analogous to imported insects
(e.g., the gypsy moth) that have escaped and, in the absence of
predators in their natural habitats, have become major pests.
Estimated Damages
Potential damages are uncertain, and any estimate would be
highly speculative.
Research Limitations
This is such a new area of development that knowledge of
the possible effects of biotechnology is an unknown.
MINOR PROBLEMS
The environmental problems that cause only minor damage to
natural resources are: To Estuaries, Coastal Waters and Oceans
from All Sources (#13) and To Wetlands from All Sources (#14),
Hazardous/Toxic Air Pollutants (#2), Discharges from Direct
and Indirect Point Sources to Surface Waters (#9, #10), Other
Criteria Air Pollutants (#1), Mining Wastes (#20), Accidental
Releases of Toxics and Oil Spills (#21, #22), Active and Inac-
tive Hazardous Waste Sites (#16, #17), Contaminated Sludge
(#12), Other Pesticide Risks (#27), and Other Ground-Water
Contamination (#24).
To Estuaries, Coastal Waters, and Oceans
from All Sources (#13)
Problem Characteristics
Deteriorating water guality caused by industrial dischar-
ges, municipal sewage effluents, pesticide runoff, application
of mosquito pesticides, tributyl tin antifouling paints on ship
bottoms, and biocides used in drilling muds have reduced commer-
cial fishing yields in estuaries and coastal waters.
4-12
-------
Research Approaches
An analysis of reductions in commercial fishing yields
for the Long Island Sound (Draft EPA report 1985) has been
extrapolated on a population basis to six other major bays and
sounds. Consumer and producer surpluses were considered to
estimate welfare losses.
Estimated Damages
An estuary improvement program at seven major bay/sound
areas would reduce commercial fishing losses by $5.5 million
to $8.3 million annually. The domestic catch of oysters, clams,
and blue crabs is valued at approximately $135 million annually.
A sizable proportion of these landings may be at risk by accumu-
lation of toxic chemicals in coastal waters.
Research Limitations
Estimates for reduction in losses are calculated for only
the National Estuary Program and are based upon a single case
study extrapolated across six bays on the basis of their popula-
tions. Population is probably a suitable measure for extrapola-
ting recreational values to an aggregate figure, but is probably
not relevant to natural resource potentials. Tin-based paints
used as antifoulants on ship bottoms could accumulate to toxic
levels, but dollar estimates of projected damages are not
available.
To Wetlands from All Sources (#14)
Problem Characteristics
Similar to estuaries and coastal waters, wetlands face
losses in commercial fishing (particularly high-value seafood,
such as shellfish) from contamination by toxic chemicals, pes-
ticides (for control of mosquitos), and disease-breeding organic
matter from various point and nonpoint sources. Many states
maintain regulatory programs that monitor shellfish growing con-
ditions and prohibit harvesting of shellfish when contaminants
(toxins or microorganisms) reach unsafe levels.
Estimated Damages
An estimate of the value of losses in the amount of sea-
food that can be harvested is not readily available for wetlands.
However, it is likely to be moderate, because wetlands account
for only a small portion of shellfish supplies, whose total an-
nual value is $370 million (including all catches within three
miles off shore).
4-13
-------
Research Limitations
Wetlands refer to zones between typical hiqh-tide water
levels and permanent vegetation. There may be some overlap
with estuaries or coastal regions.
Hazardous/Toxic Air Pollutants (#2)
Hazardous air pollutants can accumulate in soil and retard
plant growth. Two hazardous pollutants posing the greatest
threats to natural resources are cadmium and mercury. The dan-
gers are greatest where compost containing the trace elements
is repeatedly added to the same soil over many years. Quanti-
tative estimates of overall effects are not available, but it
is likely that effects range from low to moderate for crops
and agricultural lands and are low for forests. Any effects
would occur in the distant future and would probably be localized,
Discharges from Direct Point Sources to Surface Waters (#9)
Industrial plants contaminate rivers, lakes, and coastal
areas by discharging toxic, acidic, and organic wastes in their
effluents. The contaminants can render shellfish and other fish
inedible, as well as reduce the populations of fish in polluted
areas.
Most commercial seafood is caught in areas sufficiently
distant from these discharges to be relatively unaffected. Thus,
the damages these plants cause are estimated to range betweeen
low and moderate levels.
Discharges from Indirect Point Sources to Surface Waters (#10)
Contamination from sewage systems representing the combined
effluent of many facilities can infect fish and shellfish in
rivers, lakes, and coastal areas with diseases that make them
inedible and can reduce biotic activity.
Damages caused by indirect point sources are estimated to
range between low and moderate levels. This is because indirect
point sources are only one of several sources of contaminants
that have damaged fish and other forms of sea life.
Other Criteria Air Pollutants (fl)
Other than atmospheric ozone and acid precipitation, cri-
teria air pollutants are not substantial threats to natural
resources. Lead has been a source of concern, but over 90 per-
4-14
-------
cent of airborne lead emissions come from the use of lead in
gasoline, which is being phased down markedly (Mathtech, 1985).
Aside from its role in acid precipitation, SC>2 is estimated
in one study to cause likely annual losses of $0.5 million for
oats, $1.2 million for wheat, and $2.1 million for soybeans.
Losses could range up to twice these estimates in the maximum
case (Mathtech, 1986).
Other criteria air pollutants—nitrogen dioxide and carbon
monoxide—may damage crops. However, effects have not been
shown for levels typical of ambient concentrations.
Mining Waste (tt20)
Acid and other wastes associated with mining can leach
into surrounding forests or croplands. Acid mine runoff, in-
cluding acid from abandoned mines, has impaired forest growth
and diminished sportfishing opportunities in coal-mining areas,
such as Appalachia. Oil-field wastes are also a problem—
particularly drilling muds, which contain biocides toxic to
aquatic species.
In some areas where extensive strip mining of hilly slopes
has taken place, damages are severe. However, these areas
account for only a fraction of timberlands and are not necessarily
areas that would have been harvested. Thus, forest damage from
mining waste is generally minimal. The reduced sportfishing
opportunities were considered under the nonpoint source category.
Accidental Releases of Toxics (#21)
Toxic chemicals occasionally spill into waterways and
kill fish. While these spills occur irregularly, they can
cause losses of several million dollars when they reguire
the closedown of shellfish beds or other fishing areas. The
release of kepone into the James River several years ago closed
the river to all fishing for a loss of $12.0 million annually
(O'Mara and Reynolds, EPA, 1976).
Accidental Oil Spills (#22)
Oil spills from offshore drilling accidents or ruptures in
storage tanks or tanker vesels can damage coastal and ocean sea
life. Some oil spills have been extremely difficult to control
and occur in prime fishing grounds, such as the Gulf of Mexico.
However, damages to commercial fishing caused by oil spills
generally are low.
4-15
-------
Active Hazardous Waste Sites (#16)
Long-term seepage of chemicals from hazardous waste dispo-
sal sites contaminates underground aquifers, reducing the supply
of water for irrigation in rural areas. The loss of irrigation
water may necessitate converting valuable irrigated crop acreage
into less productive pasture areas. However, these damages
are likely to be low, because they are localized.
Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites (#17)
As with active hazardous waste sites, inactive hazardous
waste sites threaten water supplies with contamination in the
long term, also reducing the supply of water for irrigation.
Nearby farms may have to switch to nonirrigated crops or uses.
Nevertheless, damages for crops and agricultural land are
likely to be low, because most contamination is localized, and
other sources are sometimes available for irrigation water.
Contaminated Sludge (#12)
When disposed of at sea, contaminated sludge can create
unhealthy conditions and reduce the number of areas that can
be fished commercially. This loss is likely to be low in
magnitude, however.
Other Pesticide Risks (#27)
Application of pesticides in farm areas contaminates ponds,
water supplies, and feeds, and occasionally leads to deaths of
cattle, farm animals, and such wild birds as geese and ducks.
Use of turf insecticides and herbicides on residential lawns
also contributes to the problem.
Many of the losses associated with pesticides have been
considered in other problem areas, such as contamination of
estuaries, and nonpoint-source runoff. Losses in this remain-
ing category probably are low.
Other Ground-Water Contamination (#24)
Septic systems, road salt, injection wells, and other mis-
cellaneous sources also pollute ground-water aquifers. Because
they marginally impair the supply of water for irrigation, they
will cause only minor crop losses.
4-16
-------
SUMMARY
The greatest dangers to the availability of commercial supplies
of natural resources are ambient ozone, acid precipitation,
stratospheric ozone depletion, nonpoint-source discharges to
surface waters, and CC>2 and global warming. Possible accidents
involving biotechnology could also lead to substantial damages.
Agricultural commodities are the natural resources most at
risk of being damaged by pollutants. The reactions of various
species differ, but the growth of major crops, such as corn and
soybeans, can be impaired by pollution.
When atmospheric ozone, acid precipitation, and the criteria
air pollutants are aggregated back to the single environmental
problem area entitled "Criteria Air Pollutants from Mobile and
Stationary Sources," that area is clearly the most significant
of the problem areas.
Stratospheric ozone depletion stands out as a major possible
long-term danger due to the potential effects of increased UV-B
radiation on a large number of plant and animal species. How-
ever, the estimates presented in this report are only informal
estimates.
As a closing comment, it is probably important to point
out that the estimates of damages shown in this chapter are
merely rough estimates of private market losses to the identi-
fied natural resources. They do not capture all losses, since
they are incomplete in terms of total geographic and/or commod-
ity coverage. Furthermore, they have been estimated under some
rather simplistic assumptions that ignore government subsidy
payments for agricultural commodities. We have not used infor-
mation that is sufficient enough for us to be completely comfor-
table that the estimates presented in this chapter represent
an accurate portrayal of social losses.
4-17
-------
Chapter 5
Damages to Commerical and Public Property and
to Ground-Water Supplies
INTRODUCTION
This chapter assesses damages to property from air and water
pollution that have not been addressed elsewhere and to ground-
water supplies. We found only limited quantitative analysis
of these types of damages, which makes it difficult to develop
reliable estimates of national damages. As a result, the ranking
in Table 5-1 is based primarily on our professional judgment.
MAJOR PROBLEMS
Major damages to commercial and public property and to
ground-water supplies are caused by C02 and Global Warming (18);
inactive Hazardous (#17), Municipal Nonhazardous (#18), Industrial
Nonhazardous (#19), and Active Hazardous (#16) Waste Sites;
Releases from Storage Tanks (#23); Accidental Releases of
Toxics (#21); and Indoor Radon (#4).
CO? and Global Warming (#8)
Problem Characteristics
Atmospheric concentrations of C02 are projected to increase
over the next century due to increased fossil fuel combustion
and decreases in tropical forests from development pressures.
Higher levels of C02 are projected to raise climatic tempera-
tures globally by roughly two degrees centigrade (2°C), melting
polar ice and raising the sea level by the year 2050. As the
sea level rises, large areas could be inundated, resulting in
substantial property damages to public infrastructure (such as
road, bridges, and utilities) and private infrastructure (such as
commercial office buildings, factories, residences, and shopping
areas).
Research Approaches
Case studies of the economic effects of projected sea
level rise have been undertaken for two cities—Charleston,
South Carolina, and Galveston, Texas (Titus et al., 1984).
Both cities are situated in low-lying coastal lands that would
be significantly affected by a rise in the sea level.
5-1
-------
Table 5-1
Rankings of Environmental Problems; Damages to
{ and Ground-Water S
[billions of 1986 $)
Loss in Loss of
Property Ground-Water
Environmental Problems Value Supplies
Major Problems
C02/Global Warming S/XS
Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites M/S S
Nonhazardous Municipal Waste Sites M/S S
Active Hazardous Waste Sites M/S M/S
Nonhazardous Industrial Waste Sites M/S M/S
Releases from Storage Tanks M/S M/S
Accidental Releases of Toxics M/S
Indoor Radon M/S
Minor Problems
Other Pesticide Risks ? L/M
Other Ground-Water Contamination L ?
Radiacion Other Than Radon L ?
Key to Effects; Letter codes correspond to order-of-magnitude
ranges for annual effects:
XS = Extremely Significant: damages of $1 billion or more.
S = Significant: damages of $100 million-$999 million.
M = Moderate: damages of $10 million-$99 million.
L = Low: damages of $1 million-$9 million.
-- = N/A or near 0: damages of $0 to several million dollars,
(?) = Uncertain: potentially high damages, but subject to
great uncertainty.
5-2
-------
Estimated Damages
For Charleston, cumulative damages from 1980 to 2075 and
discounted at three percent per year have been projected to be
$730 million to $1,190 million. For Galveston, cumulative
damages for the same time period using the same discounting
procedure have been estimated to be between $415 million and
$965 million.
Research Limitations
While these estimates give some perspective on the poten-
tial extent of damages from this environmental problem, they
are not particularly useful for this project. First, these
damages need to be assessed in annual terms. Given that these
damages occur over 95 years, annual damages would only be tens
of million dollars for these two cities. Second, these case
studies present damage estimates for only two cities. They do
not attempt to extrapolate the estimates to a national damage
figure. Third, the case studies do not attempt to assess miti-
gating behavior on the part of communities in response to a
modest rise in sea level. It is very likely that mitigation
measures will be less expensive than the option of losing infra-
structure. If evaluated, the costs of the mitigating behavior
would become the upper bound on welfare losses. Finally, there
are great uncertainties in predicting sea level rise because
of the difficulty in predicting global weather patterns in the
distant future. Despite these limitations, the work group
ranked this problem as significant to extremely significant.
Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites (#7)
Problem Characteristics
Currently, there are 888 hazardous waste sites on EPA's
National Priority List (NPL). Contamination at these sites is
significant enough to warrant inclusion in the federal Super-
fund program. Roughly 6,000 additional waste sites have been
inspected, and a portion of these eventually will be classified
as NPL sites. Another 18,000 sites have had preliminary inspec-
tions, and a smaller percentage of these sites are likely to
make the NPL. About 75 percent of the NPL sites are contamin-
ating ground water, roughly 45 percent are contaminating surface
water, and 15 percent are polluting the air.
Contaminated ground water can be dealt with by removing the
source of contamination and restoring the aquifer, treating con-
taminated ground water at the wellhead before use, or providing
alternative drinking water supplies. In addition, property val-
ues of residences surrounding hazardous waste sites may be lower
than comparable homes elsewhere because of factors associated
5-3
-------
with these sites. These factors include possible exposure of
the occupants of nearby residences to toxic chemicals and the
attendant health problems, bothersome odors, and the aesthetic
appearance of the site.
Research Approaches
Schulze et al. (1986) used statistical techniques to evalu-
ate declines in property values of residences surrounding two
hazardous waste landfills in California. The sites received
both municipal and hazardous wastes and are located in highly
populated suburban communities. Methane gas has migrated from
the sites, creating the potential for explosions and triggering
evacuations at one site. In addition, vinyl chloride (a carcin-
ogen) and bothersome odors are present at both sites.
The Schulze et al. study related the sales prices of prop-
erties surrounding the two sites and properties distant from
the sites to a variety of factors that are thought to influence
property values (size of home, number of bathrooms, etc.).
Regression analysis was used to estimate the extent to which
the sales prices of homes were reduced by virtue of being
located near the sites.
Estimated Damages
The property values of homes located within 1,000 feet of
the sites were estimated to be reduced by about $10,000, on
average. The sales prices of homes beyond this distance did
not appear to be affected by the sites.
Research Limitations
This study examined the property values of residences close
to two hazardous waste sites. Information on property values
around a broad range of sites was not available. Thus, extrap-
olation of the case study results to the larger universe of
Superfund sites was deemed inappropriate because of the widely
varying characteristics of sites and land-use patterns surround-
ing them.
It is not clear if the reductions in the values of resi-
dences near hazardous waste sites will be permanent. These
values depend in part on the public's perceptions of the risks
inherent in living near the sites. If public perceptions change
and affect property values, the estimates of welfare losses will
change. There is uncertainty about the portion of the reductions
in property values that is attributable to the pollution from
these facilities, versus other undesirable characteristics,
such as the visual aesthetics of the sites and unpleasant
odors.
5-4
-------
No comprehensive estimates of the costs arising from the
contamination of drinking water supplies around Superfund sites
was available. However, ground water is contaminated at most
Superfund sites, and substantial costs will be incurred to
restore contaminated aguifers and to supply alternative drinking
water. Although only limited information was available concerning
welfare losses at Superfund sites, we thought losses could be
quite large. Thus, we ranked this environmental problem as
moderate to significant.
Nonhazardous Municipal Waste Sites (#18)
Problem Characterstics
This environmental problem includes municipal landfills,
municipal refuse incinerators, and municipal surface impound-
ments. There are about 9,100 active and 30,000 closed muni-
cipal landfills; there are about 300 sludge incinerators oper-
ating at about 195 sites; there are about 100 municipal refuse
incinerators; and there are about 20,000 municipal surface
impoundments. Property values may be lowered for residences
near these sites because of perceived health effects, odors,
methane gas migration (for landfills), and the general operation
of facilities. The municipal landfills and surface water
impoundments also contaminate ground water and affect private
and public drinking water wells.
Research Approaches
The Schulze et al. study (1986) estimated reductions in
property values for two municipal landfills that accepted both
hazardous and municipal wastes. The results of that study sug-
gest that property values may be lower for residences located
near municipal landfills.
Another analysis conducted for the Office of Solid Waste (1986)
estimated the costs associated with dealing with contaminated
ground water at municipal landfills. A ground-water model was
used to model the extent of contamination around municipal land-
fills for various hydrogeological and climatic settings over a
200-year period. These results, in combination with hypothe-
tical data on wellfields surrounding municipal landfills, were
used to estimate the lesser of the cost of cleaning up the con-
taminated portion of the aquifer or of providing alternative
drinking water supplies.
Estimated Damages
The extent of contamination and the resultant resource
damage varied considerably, depending on the type of hydrogeo-
logy and the distance and the number of wells surrounding the
site. The average resource damage on an annual basis is roughly
5-5
-------
$12,000 per site. Extrapolating to the universe of 39,000
open and closed landfills yielded an estimate of about $470
million per year in welfare losses.
Research Limitations
The above estimate provides only a general indication of
potential damages. It is based upon preliminary analysis of
a hypothetical set of landfills, rather than actual landfills.
Information on the likely concentration of constituents in
leachate is poor, and the potential damages from the migration
of methane gas was not factored into the analysis.
No information was available to estimate property value
losses associated with municipal refuse and sludge incinerators
and surface impoundments or the extent of ground-water contam-
ination associated with municipal surface impoundments.
Despite these uncertainties, we thought that the welfare
effects associated with this environmental problem were signifi-
cant. We based our judgment on the large number of municipal
waste sites, and their potential for lowering property values
and contaminating ground water.
Active Hazardous Waste Sites (#16)
Problem Characteristics
This environmental problem included RCRA landfills and sur-
face impoundments (both open and closed), hazardous waste stor-
age tanks, solid waste management units (SMUs), and facilities
handling waste oil. There are about 1,500 facilities with
RCRA landfills and surface impoundments (about 400 are planning
to continue operating); about 15,000 hazardous waste storage,
treatment, and accumulation tanks located at about 5,000 facili-
ties; about 11,400 small-quantity generator facilities with
hazardous waste storage tanks; and about 9,000 SMUs (these are
broadly defined—they range from buried asphalt to industrial
landfills contaminated with hazardous materials).
Property values may be lower for residences near these
sites because of the perceived health effects, odors, and gen-
eral operation of the facilities. Ground water may also be
contaminated by RCRA landfills and surface impoundments, SMUs,
and leaks from storage tanks. A substantial portion of RCRA
landfills are located close to surface water (mostly rivers),
suggesting that ground-water contamination has been restricted
to small areas at many sites, and that the landfills may be a
source of significant surface water contamination.
5-6
-------
Research Limitations
The results of the Schulze et al. (1986) study suggested
that the property values of residences close to RCRA landfills
(and possibly surface impoundments) were likely to be reduced.
However, no quantitative estimate of losses was available. No
studies have been completed that assess the costs associated
with dealing with ground-water contamination at these types
of sites, and the extent of ground water contamination and
associated welfare damages from storage tanks and SMUs was
unknown.
Outside of the Schulze et al. study, little research has
attempted to assess property losses to residences close to these
sites. No national estimate of damages from this environmental
problem could be determined. In spite of this lack of quantita-
tive information, we ranked this problem as moderate to signifi-
cant.
Nonhazardous Industrial Waste Sites (#19)
Problem Characteristics
with other types of waste sites, nonhazardous indus-
trial waste sites may reduce property values and may contami-
nate ground water. There are about 3,400 industrial landfills,
15,000 industrial surface impoundments, and 120,000 oil and
gas waste impoundments throughout the country. Limited infor-
mation suggests that local ground-water contamination may be severe
at some facilities. As a result, we ranked this problem as
moderate to significant.
Research Limitations
Because data are not available, we could not determine how
extensively nonhazardous waste sites reduce property values or
contaminate ground water. Thus, we used our judgment to rank
this problem.
Releases from Storage Tanks (#23)
Problem Characteristics
There are about 1.3 million underground storage tanks
throughout the country. Most of the tanks store gasoline and
petroleum products (hazardous waste storage tanks were included
in the above section on Active Haz-ardous Waste Sites — #16). Cur-
rent estimates are that 10 to 20 percent of these tanks are
leaking and may contaminate private and public drinking wells
and create problems with combustible fumes in buildings.
5-7
-------
About nine percent of documented release incidents involve combus-
tible fumes in confined areas and eight percent of documented
incidents have contaminated private wells.
Research Approaches
The Underground Storage Tank (UST) model (a Monte Carlo
simulation model) has been used to simulate the frequency and
extent of damages related to vapors and to ground water. The model
assumes that tank owners would undertake corrective action
(as evidenced in damage cases) to address the source of con-
tamination when leaks were detected.
Estimated Damages
Damages from leaks were estimated to be about $290 million
per year over the next decade. About 80 percent of the damages
are associated with tanks installed before 1984 (tanks installed
after 1984 have lower leak rates and lower expected releases).
As the tank population is replaced, damages are estimated to
decline to about $7 million per year.
Research Limitations
None of the costs of corrective action, such as removal of
tanks, recovery of free products, or treatment of ground water,
was included in the above damage estimates. About 80 percent
of the releases were estimated to involve vapors in confined
areas or damages to private drinking water. However, some of
these releases could require extensive and costly corrective
action. Thus, we ranked this problem as moderate to significant.
Accidental Releases of Toxics (#21)
Problem Characteristics
Accidental releases of hazardous materials occur at production
facilities and during transport and many contaminate soil and surface
water or damage roadways, buildings, and other types of prop-
erty.
Research Limitations
Calculating the environmental and property damages attribu-
table to accidental toxic releases is difficult. Damages
reported in the Hazardous Events Data Base refer to damages to
the facilities or vehicles responsible for the releases rather
than to damages to nearby property or to the environment from
the release and migration of toxic materials. Our consensus
was that damages to property caused by accidental releases of
toxic substances were on the order of moderate to significant.
5-8
-------
Indoor Radon (#4)
Problem Characteristics
Radon is a radioactive qas produced by the disintegration
of radium. It migrates through the soil into buildings, where
it is trapped by dense building materials. Because the decay
products of radon pose a serious health hazard, areas known to
have high levels of radon may suffer marked reductions in resi-
dential property values.
Estimated Damages
Property losses due to radon have not been studied. Only
recently have monitors been commerically available for measuring
whether particular homesites are contaminated by radon. Once
monitoring becomes widespread, it is anticipated that residences
that are contaminated by radon will be discounted in the market-
place. Damages would be limited to the cost of averting beha-
vior, which in this case would result in installing controls to
limit radon accumulation. Controls may cost on the order of
$1,000 to $1,500 per house affected. National damages may be
eguivalent to moderate levels if a large number of residences
are retrofitted with controls over a number of years.
MINOR PROBLEMS
The problems we have ranked as causing only minor damage
to public property and ground-water supplies are Other Pesticide
Risks (#27), Other Ground-Water Contamination (#24), and Radia-
tion Other Than Radon (#16).
Other Pesticide Risks (#27)
When pesticides seep into ground water, costs must be
incurred either to remove the pesticides from the ground water
or to provide alternative sources of drinking water. For example,
when aldicarb was found in 1979 in drinking water in Suffolk
County, Long Island, filtration systems were installed to elim-
inate the problem. The one-time capital and installation costs
(including compensation for bottled water) were roughly $4 mil-
lion, and the annual costs of monitoring, recharging filters,
and inspecting the water are roughly $1 million.
While this incident gave us some indication of the nature
of^this problem, we could not estimate national damages, since
neither the extent of pesticide contamination of ground water
nor the costs that society is likely to incur to mitigate this
problem were available. We ranked this problem as low to mod-
erate.
5-9
-------
Other Ground-Water Contamination (124)
A. variety of sources of pollution contaminate ground water,
These include miscellaneous tailing, mining wastes, and injec-
tion wells. Many of these sources of pollution have been con-
sidered in other portions of this report. We ranked this prob-
lem as low for being a source of property value declines.
Radiation Other Than Radon (#16)
The presence of radioactive materials and wastes decreases
the values of property near the waste. However, overall prop-
erty damages are likely to be low.
SUMMARY
Little documentation is available on declines in property
values and damages to ground-water supplies. As a result, we
largely used our judgment in determining how extensively alter-
native environmental problems contribute to these losses. Major
environmental problems threatening property values or ground-
water supplies are CC>2 and Global Warming, Inactive and Active
Hazardous Waste Sites, Nonhazardous Municipal and Industrial
Waste Sites, Releases from Storage Tanks, Accidental Releases
of Toxics, and Indoor Radon.
5-10
-------
Chapter 6
Aesthetic and Nonuser Values
INTRODUCTION
This chapter addresses environmental problems that influ-
ence aesthetic and nonuser values. These values are traditionally
addressed together because of their intangible contribution to
welfare.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS AFFECTING AESTHETICS
Aesthetic values are derived from the senses of hearing,
smell, taste, and sight. Man-made pollution can impair the
quality of these sensory experiences by causing noise and
unpleasant odors, fouling the taste of drinking water, and
reducing visibility.
A cursory review of the 31 environmental problems suggests
that at least 27 may lead to aesthetic damages. The problems not
likely to directly influence aesthetic experiences are Indoor
Radon (#4), Radiation Other than Radon (#6), New Toxic Chemicals
(#28), and Biotechnology (#29).
Our goal was to quantify and rank the 27 problems by the
significance of the harm they cause to aesthetic experiences.
However, because of a lack of data, we could only rank two
major problems: Criteria Air Pollutants (#1) and Other Air
Pollutants (#3). Table 6-1 presents this ranking.
Criteria Air Pollutants (#1)
Air pollution can diminish visual experiences by reducing
visual range, by discoloring and layering the atmosphere, and
by creating plume blight. This section focuses on the impact
of air pollution on visibility, which has been studied extensively,
Problem Characteristics
Reductions in visibility are usually measured in terms of
reduced visual range, which is the distance at which an object
is just visible. Theoretical analyses have indicated that
because of their physical characteristics and variations in
pollutant concentrations, different particles in the atmosphere
contribute differently to decreasing visibility.
6-1
-------
Table 6-1
Ranking of Environmental Problems
That Hinder Aesthetic Experiences
(billions of 1986 $)
Others:
Environmental Visibility Unpleasant Unsightliness
Problems Degradation Odors Noise Bad Taste
Major Problems
Criteria Air 1.5-8.0*
Pollutants
Other Air
Pollutants — XS/S
(noise and odors)
* These figures reflect damages for 31 eastern states and parts
of California.
Key to Effects; Letter codes correspond to order of magnitude
ranges for annual effects:
XS = Extremely Significant: damages of $1 billion or more.
S = Significant: damages of $100 million-$999 million.
M = Moderate: damages of $10 million-$99 million.
L = Low: damages of $1 million-$9 million.
-- = Not available or near 0: damages of $0 to several
million dollars.
(?) = Uncertain: potentially high damages, but subject to
great uncertainty.
6-2
-------
At many sites throughout the country, and especially in
the eastern portion of the United States, sulfates (a transfor-
mation product of sulfur dioxide) are the greatest irapairers
of visibility. However, significant exceptions to this rule oc-
cur in the Pacific Northwest and Denver, where total carbon causes
the largest reductions in visual range (EPA, 1986, p. 30).
Nitrates, condensible organics, and other fine particles also
degrade visibility, though to a lesser extent than do sulfates.
Research Approaches
For "nonmarket" research methodologies, two relationships
are crucial to estimating damages from decreased visual range.
One is the relationship between ambient concentrations of var-
ious pollutants and visible range. The other is the connection
between visual range and the monetary value of observing a par-
ticular visual range. Thus, a visibility study is effectively
a two-step process. In the first step, the investigator de-
scribes a change in emissions and projects the change in visual
range. Then, in the second step, the investigator determines
observers' assessments of the value of the change in visual
range.
For households in the eastern portion of the United States,
a one-mile decrement in the visual range these people typically
experience implies an annual damage per household of roughly $14.
This figure is based primarily on the results of a contingent-
valuation study (the "Six Cities" study) conducted by Tolley et
al. (1985) in six eastern cities: Washingtbn, D.C., Atlanta,
Mobile, Boston, Miami, and Cincinnati. This value is, therefore,
most appropriate for these six cities and for other cities with
characteristics similar to those of these six cities, especially
those with visual ranges on a typical day of around ten miles.
While the Six Cities study is the most comprehensive contin-
gent-valuation study of the value of visibility to urban resi-
dents, contingent-valuation studies for other cities (Chicago,
Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Cincinnati) provide information
useful for making a high-range estimate (EPA, 1985). While
differences in scenarios make comparisons difficult, these addi-
tional studies found that per-mile values were somewhat higher
than the Tolley et al. estimate in San Francisco, considerably
higher in Cincinnati, and somewhat lower in Los Angeles. Higher
per-mile values tend to be obtained for smaller changes in visi-
bility and for preventing degradations versus obtaining improve-
ments. Average values of $35 or more for every mile of change
in visual range were obtained in several scenarios evaluated in
these studies, especially—but not exclusively—in scenarios
considering visual changes of five miles or less and for pre-
venting deterioration from current conditions.
6-3
-------
For estimatinq a high-range value, EPA (1985) used an
annual value of about $39 for a one-mile change from the mean
visual range. EPA (1985) also used one-half of the mid-range
for a lower-range estimate. We interpreted it as a conserva-
tive lower bound: an annual value of about $7.30 per mile at
the ten-mile mean, which is about as low as any per-mile values
that have been obtained for any city (as a citywide average)
in any contingent-valuation study.
Because of the distinctive features of scenic natural areas,
none of the foregoing relationships represents the value of
visual range at national parks. This value reguires a separate
treatment.
Rowe et al. (1986) have summarized the seven contingent-
valuation studies that have been conducted in parks and recrea-
tional areas across the country concerning the value to visitors
of protecting visibility during their visits. These studies
have been conducted in Grand Canyon and Mesa Verde National
Parks, Glen Canyon Recreation Area, and Great Smoky Mountains
National Park. Overall, the studies estimate values of about
$1 to $5 per visitor-party (average size comparable to a house-
hold) per day for a specified higher visibility level, rather
than a specified lower level during a park visit.
Rowe et al. pooled the results of these studies to estimate
a daily-value-per-mile function. The mid-point of the change
considered in each scenario was used as the level of visual
range. At the mean of the visual range in these studies (about
75 miles), the daily value per mile is about $0.08. This is
based on fairly large changes in visual range (an average change
of about 60 miles, minimum 20 and maximum 145) and fairly high
levels of visibility (mean midpoint 75 miles, minimum 19 and
maximum 143). It is less descriptive of the value for smaller
changes or for areas where lower levels of visual range are
typical.
Estimated Damages
Two relatively recent regional assessments--one for the
eastern United States and the other for California—have calcu-
lated an aggregate estimate of damages from impaired visibility.
These studies are based primarily on the methodology and data
described in the preceding section.
The "Regional Haze" study examined the effect on visual
range of several regional strategies for controlling emissions
of S02 (EPA, 1985). The results of the most aggressive strategy
most closely approximate the results of reducing SO2 to back-
ground levels (to levels without man-made SC>2 pollution). This
strategy would reduce annual SC>2 emissions in 31 eastern states
by 12 million tons. Large (30-50 percent) reductions in SO2
6-4
-------
emissions in those states would substantially improve annual
and summertime visibility in large portions of the East by 15
percent or more. Given these improvements, the Regional Haze
study calculated reduced damages ranging from a low of $0.9
billion, to a best estimate of $1.6 billion, and to a high of
$4.2 billion (see Table 6-2).
The Regional Haze study also covered values for visitors
at Class I areas in the East. Class I areas usually are scenic
areas where improvements in visibility will most likely result
in significant welfare gains.
The predicted changes in visibility suggested that the
average visual range at the Great Smoky Mountains National Park
would improve by roughly 1.5 to 2.3 miles (about 14 to 21 per-
cent). With values per mile per visitor-party of $0.8 to $0.13,
the total annual gain to users would be worth $0.4 to $0.9 mil-
lion. The estimated improvement in visibility at Shenandoah
National Park would be about 24 percent. Because of lower
annual visitation rates, the estimated total annual gain would
be somewhat smaller than that for the Great Smokies. The pre-
dicted visibility change at Acadia National Park was only about
5 percent. Therefore, it was presumed to be imperceptible.
Extrapolating these figures to a national figure, the authors
of the Regional Haze study concluded that the annual aesthetic
gains for visitors to Class I areas would be around $10.0
million.
The California study (Rowe et al., 1986) estimated the val-
ue of controlling air pollution in four California air basins
containing 80 percent of the state's population and probably
an even greater share of the visibility values. These basins
were the Los Angeles Air Basin, the San Francisco Bay Area Air
Basin, the San Diego Air Basin, and the San Joaguin Valley Air
Basin.
None of the modeled scenarios reduced air pollution to
background levels. Rather, the scenarios compared past and
present controlled levels of air pollution to more lenient
levels of control. The study estimated emissions and ambient
pollutant concentrations for each scenario. Visual range
(annual average) at each monitoring station was calculated
using coefficients estimated from historical data for each
station, and modeled ambient levels of pollutants under alter-
native scenarios for each station.
Based on contingent-valuation and property value studies,
Rowe et al. selected a per-mile value of $35 per household for
changes in urban visual range. Gains were also estimated for
visitors to national and state parks and national forests.
6-5
-------
For the purposes of this effort, the most appropriate
scenario compared predicted 1987 emissions with planned con-
trols to predicted 1987 emissions with air pollution controls
set at a level of stringency characteristic of 1960. While no
scenario compared existing visibility to background visibility,
this scenario was comparable because it was based on the largest
change in visibility and the nearest year. Total gains ranged
from an upper estimate of $3.8 billion, to a best estimate of
$1.4 billion, to a low estimate of $0.6 billion.
Table 6-2
Summary of Damages from Impaired Visibility
(billions of 1986 $)
Affected Areas Low Middle High
31 Eastern States
Portions of California
Total Damages
0.9
0.6
1.5
1.6
1.4
3.0
4.2
3.8
8.0
Research Limitations
Any interpretation of the figures in Table 6-2 should
reflect the inherent limitations of the air quality/visual range
and visual range/valuation relationships that underlie these
estimates. It must also recognize the limited coverage of
visual aesthetic damages. The figures omit other visibility
characteristics (such as discoloration, layering, and plume
blight). Also, nonuser values were not considered.
Geographical coverage is incomplete. Parts of California
and the 31 eastern states do not constitute a national analysis.
And even within the visual range aesthetics category for parts
of California and the 31 eastern states, a 100 percent reduction
in manmade pollution from current levels has not been simulated.
Only partial reduction of some of the pollutants impairing vis-
ibility has been reflected in the assessments to date.
6-6
-------
Other Air Pollutants (#3); Odors
Problem Characteristics
Unpleasant odors are emitted from feedlots, industrial
plants, municipal landfills, kraft pulp mills, residential
leaf burning, fish kills and algae blooms caused from water
pollution, chemical production and disposal processes, water
with high sulfur and chlorine content, pesticide applications,
and manure applied to fields.
Research Approaches
Property value (Copley International, 1973) and contingent-
valuation studies (Charles River Associates, 1983) have assessed
people's willingness to pay to eliminate foul odors.
Estimated Damages
Respondents to the Charles River study bid, on average,
$70 annually to eliminate exposure to odors from diesel exhaust.
The average respondent reported 14.5 contacts with diesel emis-
sions from vehicles per week (754 contacts per year). By extra-
polating this figure across the urban population of the United
States, the study calculated annual total damages of $5.3 billon.
Research Limitations
We thought that the $5.3 billion estimate of willingness
to pay to avoid diesel odors alone was implausibly high. While
no alternative studies were available to estimate these welfare
risks, we ranked odors as a significant to extremely significant
environmental problem. The major impetus for this ranking was
the fact that over half the complaints that EPA faces at the
local and state levels involve odors of one type or another.
Other Air Pollutants (#3); Noise
Problem Characteristics
Noise levels of 55 decibles or higher (technically, day-
night sound level, "Ldn") interfere with normal speech, relaxa-
tion, and privacy. In the list of 31 environmental problems,
noise may manifest itself in a number of different ways. It is
emitted from industrial activities, traffic on freeways, active
hazardous and nonhazardous waste sites, aircraft, or such con-
sumer products as lawn mowers. Although data on the freguency
and duration of noise levels exceeding 55 Ldn were not available,
Table 6-3 shows that 40 percent of the United States population
is estimated to live or work in environments exceeding the 55
Ldn level.
6-7
-------
Table 6-3
U.S. Population Exposed to Noise Levels
Exceeding 55 Ldnf by Noise Source
(in millions)
Urban
Traffic
102.1
Rural
Traffic
4.8
Air-
craft
50
Rail
2.4
Agri-
culture
0.1
Indus-
trial
6.3
Home
Appliances
15.0
Source: CEQ Annual Report (1979), Chapter 9 (Noise).
Estimated Damages
In spite of the paucity of data, we felt that noise pollu-
tion is a potentially serious environmental problem, often over-
looked in discussions of environmental pollution.
NONUSE VALUES OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
When we consider the goals of environmental protection, we
usually think first of "use" values. We talk about how reduc-
tions in pollution will improve human health (by reducing mor-
tality and morbidity), enhance recreational opportunities, and
increase the productivity of natural resources (such as crops,
forests, and fisheries). However, two additional types of
value are derived from environmental protection: "option" and
"existence" value. These values are sometimes referred to as
intrinsic or as "nonuser" values, to distinguish them from
values experienced by actual users.
Option value is the value of preserving the opportunity to
use a resource in the future. (Oftentimes, option value is
inappropriately used to consider the expected value of future
use of a resource). As used in environmental management, option
value is similar to what we would pay now to preserve our right
to buy a particular parcel of land in the future—say, one that
has unigue value for an industrial or commercial use.
Existence value is the value of the mere knowledge that
the resource exists or that the resource exists in its pristine
form. Sometimes existence value is referred to as "vicarious
consumption" value (such as the satisfaction derived from pro-
viding food to people affected by famine) and "beguest value"
(such as the satisfaction of knowing that a clean aquifer will
be available to future generations). Although there is some
looseness in the terminology used to describe this class of
6-8
-------
nonuse values, there is general agreement that popular recogni-
tion of stewardship responsibilities implies positive existence
values for environmental resources.
The salient characteristics of goods with significant
option or existence values are that they have no suitable substi-
tutues, their future existence is threatened, and they would be
very costly or impossible to replace if destroyed. While diffi-
cult to quantify, these intrinsic values should be factored into
any assessment of the comparative risks of alternative environ-
mental problems. These values are the residual values that are
added to users' total willingness to pay for a particular im-
provement in environmental guality.
Surface Water
Resource To Be Valued
People who will never use a particular water body still may
value its quality because they know others can enjoy its use
or because they value the preservation of ecological diversity.
Research Approaches
Recent studies provide evidence that option and existence
values are significant components of the total value derived
from environmental protection (Table 6-4). Mitchell and Carson
(1984) applied contingent-valuation surveys to estimate the val-
ues held by a representative national sample for various levels
of surface water quality. (See Chapter 3 for further discus-
sions of the Mitchell and Carson study.) Users were defined
according to whether they had participated in any direct-contact
(i.e., in-stream) activities within the past two years. The
results were not linked to changes at a particular site, but
rather to the guality of all the nation's waterways. For water
of "fishable" guality, the average bid for nonusers was 47 per-
cent of the mean total bid obtained from users. This result
lends weight to the hypothesis that the intrinsic gains of
improved water guality may be systematically related to recrea-
tional values.
Desvousges, Smith, and McGivney (1983) interviewed 301
households in the Pennsylvania portion of the Monongahela River
watershed. Before asking the willingness-to-pay questions, the
interviewer explained the concepts of use, option, and existence
values. Table 6-4 reports the results of the survey.
Cronin (1982) surveyed approximately 1,530 people in the
Potomac River basin in 1973. The study was desiqned to compare
users' and nonusers1 willinqness to pay for water quality improve-
ments. It sugqested that intrinsic values for water quality
6-9
-------
were 67-71 percent of use values. Using a more refined
definition of nonusers, Cronin (forthcoming) has recently found
intrinsic values to be 48-80 percent of use values.
Estimated Nonuse Value
These studies (and several others) indicate that excludir.q
intrinsic values would understate the total welfare gains of
water quality improvements. They support the hypothesis that
intrinsic values of improved water quality are not only positive
but substantial. The ratios of intrinsic-to-use values range
from 0.44 to 0.80.
Since three of the studies focused on two specific water
bodies, it could be argued that nonuser values may overstate
intrinsic values if they decrease with distance from the recrea-
tion site. However, Mitchell and Carson (1984) asked about
national water quality, rather than values for specific sites.
Although there is some question about whether respondents
actually related their answers to nearby sites, the Mitchell-
Carson ratio of intrinsic to use values is consistent with the
site-specific values.
Ground Water
Resource To Be Valued
The issue of ground-water protection is relatively new on
EPA's agenda. Many difficult technical and economic issues
need resolution. As with other changes in environmental gual-
ity, improvements in ground-water quality can increase user
and nonuser values (Table 6-5).
A strong qualitative argument exists for the hypothesis that
option and existence values for some ground-water sources are
high, since many people think that some supply alternatives (e.g.,
bottled water) are unsuitable and that there are no substitutes.
In addition, many people have expressed the desire to ensure that
clean aguifers will be available to future generations. The
popular recognition of stewardship responsibilities implies
positive existence values for ground water.
6-10
-------
Table 6-4
Use and Intrinsic Values from Current Studies
Study
Site
Estimation Technique
Dollar Estimates
(1986/household/year)
User Nonuser
Ratio of
Intrinsic
Value to Use
Comments
Mitchell and U.S. National
Carson (1984) Barks
Desvousges,
Smith, and
McGivney
(1983)
Cronin
(1982)
Monongahela
River
Potomac
River
Cronin Potomac
(forthcoming) River
National survey of
user s (recreator s)
and nonusers of
surface water re-
sources .
Residents surveyed
via bidding game,
direct question,
and question with
payment card on val-
ue of water quality.
Residents surveyed
via direct question
approach for value
of water quality.
Same as Cronin
(1982).
299
140
.47
Prevent
Loss: 60
Inprove-
ment: 72
Prevent
loss: 49
Improve-
ment : 145
Prevent
Loss: 51
Improve-
ment: 159
Prevent
Loss: 39
Improve-
ment: 32
Prevent
Loss: 35
Improve-
ment : 97
Prevent
Loss: 41
Improve-
ment: 77
.65
.44
.71
.67
.80
.48
Values presented are
for attaining "fish-
able" level of water
quality. Use value
equals the total bid
of recreators (use plus
intrinsic values for
users). Nonusers de-
fined as nonpartici-
pants in in-stream
activities within past
two years.
Summary measure may
mask differences among
question formats. Use
values may include ex-
pected use values.
Same as comment under
the Desvousges study
above.
Same as comment under
the Desvousges study
above. Nonusers are
defined as those who
would not use the Poto-
omac even if it were as
clean as they would
like. Users are pres-
ent users and those who
would use a clean river.
-------
Table 6-5
Values Related to Ground Water
Use Values
Nonuse (Intrinsic) Values
Direct Use
Withdrawal for:
0 Municipal: drinking and waste
disposal (both present and
future use)
Agricultural: irrigation
0 Industrial/commercial:
cooling, process treatment
waste disposal, generation
of steam, coal transport
Indirect Use
Source of water to streams and
lakes to maintain flow used
for recreation
Option Value
Value associated with the
preservation of the option
of using ground water
Existence Value
Existence values for steward-
ship vicarious consumption
(current period) and bequest
6-12
-------
Research Approaches
No studies have attempted to measure the nonuser (intrinsic)
value of ground water, nor is there any national assessment, as
with surface water quality, that measures intrinsic value.
An empirical argument may exist for the importance of
intrinsic value in determining the total value of a ground-water
source. The apparently "irrational" response of many communi-
ties to ground-water contamination incidents could indicate
that individuals receive satisfaction from knowing that a clean
aquifer will be available to them and to future generations. A
few cases have occurred where communities and public officials
have argued heatedly for a total cleanup of contaminated aquifers
that are currently not even being tapped and, therefore, provide
no current value to local populations. (For example, in a situa-
tion involving underground storage tanks owned by Belmont Oil,
where only irrigation water supplied by private wells had been
contaminated, and no important drinking water aquifers were
present, $900,000 was spent on restoring the aquifer.) In these
cases, people either anticipated substantial potential future
uses of the aquifer or they perceived a large unquantified value
associated with its mere presence (existence value).
The only study that has attempted to determine the magni-
tude of intrinsic value in relationship to use value was a
small pilot survey conducted in Miami, Florida, during the sum-
mer of 1984 (Rowe et al., 1985). The survey blurred the rigor-
ous distinction between use and intrinsic values. However,
the results of this survey suggested that the estimates from a
traditional damage-function approach may only be capturing 30
to 45 percent of the values for users, and an even smaller
share of the total values for society.
Air Quality
Resource To Be Valued
Intrinsic values are important in measuring the total
value of activities regulating air quality. Prevention of the
deterioration of air quality (mostly visibility impairment) is
the most often cited example of a situation with high intrinsic
as well as use value.
Research Approaches
Some preliminary efforts have been made to estimate nonuse
values for visibility in national parks. Schulze et al. (1981)
interviewed residents in Albuquerque, Denver, Chicago, and Los
Angeles concerning protection of visibility at Grand Canyon
National Park. Randall et al. (1981) also asked Chicago resi-
6-13
-------
dents about their values for protecting visibility at the Grand
Canyon, and Rae (1984) queried Cincinnati residents concerning the
protection of visibility at Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
Estimated Nonuse Value
The quantitative results obtained to date for the relative
magnitude of nonuse values for visual range in national parks
are ratios of nonuse to use values, calculated as the ratio of
the sum of all nonuse values held by users and nonusers to the
sum of all use values held by users. This ratio was signifi-
cantly higher for the Grand Canyon (200:1) than for the Great
Smoky Mountains (3:1). However, since different procedures were
used in the two studies, comparing them is difficult.
SUMMARY
The major welfare loss quantified in this chapter is vis-
ibility impairment. Criteria air pollutants are estimated to
cause at least $1.5 to $8.0 billion in annual damages by reducing
visual range. Unfortunately, little documentation was available
on the extent of other types of environmental problems in relation
to odors and noise. Nevertheless, we felt that these problems
cause large welfare losses.
While we addressed the issue of nonuser values associated
with controlling air and water pollution, we did not draw any
definitive conclusions as to the extent of these values. However,
in ranking the environmental problems, we did consider nonuser
values.
6-14
-------
Chapter 7
Summary, Conclusions/ and Recommendations
INTRODUCTION
The ranking procedure was necessarily imperfect because
the 31 environmental problems differ in:
0 the degree to which they have been studied;
0 the reliability of methods used to evaluate the magni-
tude of risks;
0 the reliability and completeness of available data and
knowledge of current pollution trends;
0 the state of scientific understanding of a particular
problem;
0 uncertainty as to the timing of effects; and
0 other factors, such as how the problems have been cate-
gorized (in some cases, for example, water pollution
sources and receptors appear in more than one problem
area, making a unique allocation of effects difficult).
The limited resources available for developing this report
and ranking exercise forced us to base the rankings on the
major effects associated with each problem. It is likely that
many problems cause numerous small effects that in the aggregate
may be guite significant. However, it was beyond the scope of
the Welfare Effects work group to fully track and attempt to
guantify these myriad effects. Also, effects that appear
small on a national level may in fact be extremely significant
to specific regions, groups, or other entities.
Finally, we could not rank eight of the environmental
problems because their welfare effects were either insignificant
or not sufficently documented. We assigned approximately egual
weight to these eight and categorized them as "minor" problems.
Table 7-1 presents the final ranking of environmental problems.
This chapter summarizes our rationales for the individual
rankings and presents our recommendations on how assessments of
welfare effects can be improved.
7-1
-------
Table 7-1
Final Rankings of Welfare Effects Work Group
Rank High Effects
1 Criteria Air Pollutants from Mobile and Stationary
Sources (including acid precipitation)
2 Nonpoint Source Discharges to Surface Waters*
3 Indirect Point-Source Discharges (POTWs) to Surface Waters
4 To Estuaries, Coastal Waters, and Oceans from All Sources
5 CC>2 and Global Warming
6 Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
7 Other Air Pollutants (odors and noise)
8 Direct Point-Source Discharges (industrial, etc.) to Surface
Waters
Medium Effects
9 Hazardous Waste Sites — Inactive (Superfund)
10 Nonhazardous Waste Sites -- iMunicipal
11 Hazardous Waste Sites — Active (RCRA)
12 To Wetlands from All Sources
13 Other Pesticide Risks -- leaching and runoff of pesticides
and agricultural chemicals, air deposition from spraying,
etc.
14 Biotechnology
Low Effects
15 Nonhazardous Waste Sites — Industrial
16 Releases from Storage Tanks (including product and petro-
leum tanks that are above, on, and underground)
17 Accidental Releases of Toxics
18 Accidental Oil Spills
19 Drinking Water as It Arrives at the Tap
20 Radon -- indoor only
21 Mining Wastes (including oil and gas extraction wastes)
22 Contaminated Sludge
23 Hazardous/Toxic Air Pollutants
Minor Effects
Other Ground Water Contamination
Radiation Other Than Radon
Indoor Air Pollutants other than Radon
Pesticide Residuals on Foods Eaten by Humans
Applicators of Pesticides (risks to applicators and con-
sumers )
New Toxic Chemicals
Consumer Product Exposure
Worker Exposure to Chemicals
Includes effects from Pesticides.
7-2
-------
SUMMARY OF RATIONALES FOR RANKINGS
The rationales for the rankings of the top 14 environ-
mental problems are presented in this section. In addition,
Table 7-2 provides comprehensive rationales for the ranking
of the top 23 problems.
Criteria Air Pollutants
We chose Criteria Air Pollutants as posing the most signi-
ficant welfare effects because of the large documented damages
they cause in many different welfare categories. For example,
they cause extensive damages to materials annually, impair
visibility, and reduce agricultural, forestry, and sportfishing
yields. Also, damages from criteria air pollutants are immediate,
ongoing, and tangible.
Water Pollution
From the start of this project, water pollution problems
were disaggregated into several distinct problems. For the
purpose of this ranking exercise, this approach lead to a some-
what fragmented discussion of their effects. Ranks #2 through
#4 are water pollution problems. The nonpoint and indirect-point
source categories represent sources of pollution, while estuaries,
coastal waters, and oceans from all sources describe major
receptors of pollution. To an unspecified degree, pollution
from nonpoint and indirect-point source categories contribute
to the effects represented under estuaries, coastal waters, and
oceans. Nonetheless, in spite of the potential double counting,
we found that these categories are significant and warrant a high
ranking on the list of welfare effects.
Reductions in the availability of recreational opportunities
are estimated at $3.7 billion annually for water pollution from
nonpoint sources and $2.5 billion per year for pollution from
indirect-point sources. Most of these welfare losses are the
consequence of lessened opportunities for using water resources,
such as reduced swimming, sportfishing, and boating activities.
Welfare effects at estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans
include reductions in swimming, sportfishing, commercial fishing,
and boating. The losses from reduced recreational activities
for estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans have been estimated
at $150 million-$500 million annually for seven major estuaries.
In addition, smaller losses to commercial fishing were demonstrated
for seven estuaries. However/ because we believe that the damages
for the seven estuaries were only a fraction of total national
damages, we ranked To Estuaries, Coastal Waters and Oceans as
fourth.
7-3
-------
Table 7-2
Summary of Ranking of Welfare Effects
Rank
Environmental
Problems
Major Characteristics
Why Ranked High
Rationale for Ranking Position
Why Not Ranked Higher
Criteria Air
Pollutants
Nbnpoint-Source
Discharges to
Surface Water
Carbon monoxide, par-
ticulates, SOX, NOX,
lead.
Runoff from farms, lawns,
etc.; includes pesticide
and fertilizer runoff and
acid mine drainage to
fresh-^ter bodies.
Multiple damage categories:
material damages and soiling,
reduced visibility, decreased
crop and forestry yields;
material damage and soiling
are large.
Major contributor to $3.7
billion/year loss of rec-
reational uses; decreased
crop yields, downgrading
of agricultural land.
Dollar values of damages not
as high as those for Criter-
ia Air Pollutants.
Discharges from
Indirect Point
Sources (POTWs)
to Surface Water
4 To Estuaries,
Coastal Waters,
and Oceans from
All Sources
and Global
Wanning
Discharges via municipal
sewer systems to fresh-
water bodies.
Category represents salt-
water receptors of dis-
charges to surface water.
Elevated temperatures
in the future due to
global accumulation
of CO2-
Secondary contributor to
$2.5 billion/year loss of
recreational uses (swim-
ming, sport fishing); re
duced commercial fishing.
$150 million-$500 million/
year loss of recreational
activities for seven estuar-
ies; shellfish and other sea
life jeopardized.
Submersion of low-lying
coastal lands and infra-
structure; property values
at risk are huge.
Damages similar to those
from nonpoint sources, but
a lesser contributor.
Less danger to recreational
opportunities; damages re-
flect mostly the value of
lost catches of shellfish
and other fish.
Effects not likely until
2050-2100 time frame; un-
certainty as to ultimate
magnitudes; problem not
well understood at present.
-------
Table 7-2 (Continued)
Summary of Rankings of Welfare Effects
Farik
Environmental
Problems
Major Characteristics
Rationale for Ranking Position
Why Ranked High
Why Not Ranked Higher
6 Stratospheric
Ozone Depletion
Other Air
Pollutants
Ul
8
10
Discharges from
Direct Point Sources
(Industrial, etc.) to
3-arface Waters
Inactive Hazardous
Waste Sites
Nbnhazardous
Municipal
Waste Sites
Ozone depletion in the
stratopshere leads to
increased UV-B radiation
in the future.
IMpleasant odors and
noise create discom-
fort.
Industrial and other
point sources of water
pollution.
Superfund and other
inactive sites.
Municipal landfills.
Value of crops, livestock,
and fish species at risk
is very high.
Among the greatest sources
of public complaints at
the local level; large
populations exposed in
urban areas.
$800 million/year in los-
ses to recreational water
uses.
Depressed property values
in vicinity; threats to
community drinking water
supplies.
Depressed property values
in vicinity; threats to
community drinking water
supplies.
Effects are not likely in the
near term; uncertainty as to
ultimate magnitudes and sus-
cepibility of species.
Difficult to monetize,
contingent-valuation
studies limited.
Damages similar to those of
nonpoint- and indirect point-
source discharges, but
smaller.
Effects are usually local;
most sites are located away
from major urban populations
and their drinking water sup-
plies; alternative water sup-
plies often exist.
Effects are usually local;
most sites are located away
from major urban populations
and their drinking water
supplies.
-------
'Fable 7-2 (Continued)
Summary of Rankings of Welfare Effects
Rank
Envi ronmental
Problems
Major Characteristics
Why Ranked High
Rationale for Ranking Position
Why Not Ranked Higher
11
Active Hazardous
Waste Sites
RCRA sites.
12
13
To Wetlands from
All Sources
Other Pesticide
Ri sks—Leaching
and Runoff of Pes-
ticides and Agri-
cultural Chemicals,
Air Deposition from
Spraying, etc.
14 Biotechnology
Discharges from point
and nonpoint sources
of pollution.
Runoff of pesticides
into surface water;
seepage of pesticides
into ground water.
Introduction of new
species of plants
and microorganisms.
Depressed property values
in vicinity; threats to
drinking water supplies.
Damage to shellfish,
wildlife.
Endangers shellfish and
certain other fish species;
dangers may not become
apparent until toxins
accumulate; ground-water
contamination.
Potential danger to crops,
livestock, trees, or mar-
ine life accompanies the
introduction of new spe-
cies into the environment;
U.S. agriculture is highly
concentrated in only a few
major crops.
Damages similar to those from
inactive hazardous waste sites
but smaller number of sites;
future wastes expected to
pose less contamination prdb~
lems.
Effects similar to those for
coastal areas and oceans, but
commercial products of wet-
lands are somewhat limited;
swimming impacts limited.
These effects are largely ac-
counted for in the environmen-
tal problems Discharges to
Surface Waters from Nonpoint
Sources and To Estuaries,
Coastal Waters, and Oceans
from All Sources.
Likelihood of negative effects
is uncertain; damages may not
occur until well into the dis-
tant future.
-------
Table 7-2 (Continued)
Summary of Rankings of Welfare Effects
Environmental
Rank Problems
Major Characteristics
Why Ranked High
Rationale for Ranking Position
Why Not Ranked Higher
15 Nbnhazardous
Industrial
Waste Sites
16 Releases from
Storage Tanks
17 Accidental
Releases of
Toxics
18 Accidental
Oil Spills
19 Drinking Vfeter
As It Arrives
at the Tap
Surface impoundments,
waste piles, tailings,
spent ore, etc.
Primarily underground
fuel tanks.
Spills and other acci-
dental releases from
industrial, trans-
portation, and storage
facilities.
During production,
transportation, and
storage.
Corrosive water results
in the leaching of lead
into municipal water
systems.
Depressed property values
in vicinity; threats to
drinking water supplies.
Damages to local property
and drinking water.
Damages to waterways and
nearby property.
Loss of recreational use
of water areas, danger to
wildlife and some fish
species.
Documented damages to
municipal water systems.
Contamination probably not
as severe as for hazardous
waste sites.
Contamination of ground-water
supplies are less of a prob-
lem than for waste sites.
Mast releases affect only
nearby property; damage to
property often is the result
of the accident (e.g., the
fire itself, rather than the
toxics released).
Tangible economic damages are
usually limited; most spills
are small.
Damages less than for other
environmental problems that
are ranked higher.
-------
Table 7-2 (Continued)
Summary of Rankings of Welfare Effects
Environmental
Rank Problem
Major Characterisitics
Rationale for Ranking Position
Why Ranked High
Why Not Ranked Higher
20 Indoor Radon
i
CO
21 Mining Wastes
22 Contaminated
Sludge
23 Hazardous/Toxic
Air Pollutants
Accumulation of low-
level radiation in
houses in certain areas.
Mine acid runoff, oil
and gas extraction,
brines and muds, ura-
nium and asbestos tail-
ings, chemical leachates
from benefication.
Municipal and scrubber
sludges, varying degrees
of contamination with
toxics.
Routine releases of
toxic air pollutants.
Could require $1,000-$!,500
in modifications per house
for many houses or cause
equivalent lowering in
property values.
Fish kills, deterioration
in surface water quality.
Leaching, deterioration
of soil and water quality.
Damages to agricultural
crops, possible property
value losses.
Counting dollar costs for
remedies may double count
the health risks by capitali-
zing the costs of their con-
trol.
Generally mining is not con-
ducted near populated areas;
most occurs in semi-arid
areas, which mitigates run-
off; most effects accounted
for in Nbnpoint Source Dis-
charges to Surface Waters.
Disposal usually takes
place in isolated areas.
Limited damages are
expected.
-------
Global Warming and Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Global warming and stratospheric ozone depletion have
been the most difficult problems for us to rank. We ranked them
in tandem because they have a number of similar characteristics
and overall damage estimates.
Global Warming
For global warming, the projected rise in the level of
the oceans poses dangers for the large investment in urban
infrastructure and both urban and agricultural lands. Losses,
though unguantified, are apt to be huge if sea level rises at
the rate at which some experts project.
On the other hand, considerable uncertainty surrounds the
projections that have been made to date. For instance/ little
is known about the impacts of global warming on future weather
patterns. Also, with a slow sea level rise, most effects will
occur far in the future in the years 2050 to 2100. Even if
these projections were accurate, we debated how significant
the effects would be. For example would these effects be of a
catastrophic or evolutionary nature? Finally, some work group
members were generally suspicious of long-range projections.
In the end, the consensus of the work group was that global
warming is a potentially serious but little understood environ-
mental problem.
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Stratospheric ozone depletion also poses potentially sig-
nificant welfare risks. Its characteristics are similar to
those of global warming, such as long-term potentially large
impacts in the future that are not very well understood at pre-
sent. Unlike global warming, which primarily endangers prop-
erty and land, stratospheric ozone depletion primarily threat-
ens animal and plant life, as it is believed that increased
levels of ultraviolet-B radiation may kill or impair some
species of plant, animal, and marine life. Also, weather
patterns may be influenced by changes in ultraviolet-B radia-
tion (as well as by global warming), resulting in many effects
that are difficult to foresee currently.
Other Air Pollutants (Noise and Odors)
We ranked noise and odors high because these environmental
problems can significantly disrupt the daily lives of large
numbers of people, particularly in urban areas. About 40 percent
of Americans are exposed to elevated noise levels that result
in welfare losses.
7-9
-------
For odors, the one study cited estimated large welfare losses,
While many members of the work group thought this study over-
valued the welfare effects, the entire work group nevertheless
remained convinced that noise and odors are serious problems.
One reason for this judgment is that over half the complaints
that state and local environmental agencies have received
concern unwanted odors or noise.
Discharges from Direct Point Sources
This problem ranked high because it causes an estimated
$800 million in national damages annually. These damages
appear in the forms of foregone recreational activities—such
as swimming, boating, and fishing—and reduced commercial
fishing yields.
Waste Sites
Waste sites occupy the next three places in the environ-
mental ranking. Hazardous wastes oftentimes threaten community
drinking water supplies, and both hazardous and nonhazardous
wastes sites can reduce property values of residences nearby.
These problems were not ranked higher because most of their
effects are localized, and most waste sites are located away
from areas of high population density. Active hazardous waste
sites were ranked lower than inactive sites because the potential
number of inactive sites is greater and contamination problems
are likely to be more severe.
Some members of the work group thought that the environmen-
tal problems caused by waste sites should be ranked higher
because the option and existence values associated with ground
water are high. Little guantitative evidence could be brought
to bear on this subject, and estimates of the size of these
values remained unresolved.
Wetlands
Discharges from point and nonpoint sources are the major
threats to wetlands. Sizable guantities of harvestable shell-
fish and wildlife are jeopardized by such hazards as pesticide
runoff and accumulation. The potential losses for wetlands
parallel those for estuaries, coastal waters, and oceans, but
are on a lesser scale in terms of their recreational and natural
resource values. To some extent, damages to wetlands have been
allotted to other categories of environmental problems, such as
pesticides and discharges from point and nonpoint sources of
pollution.
7-10
-------
Pesticides
Other pesticide risks primarily stem from surface and
ground-water contamination from pesticide use. The types of
welfare risks from pesticides were largely subsumed under the
environmental problems Discharges from Nonpoint Sources to Sur-
face Waters and To Estuaries, Coastal Waters, and Oceans from
All Sources. Because we were not presented with a systematic
study of effects from pesticides, we based this ranking
largely on our subjective judgment of what the effects are
likely to be.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology occupied a somewhat controversial fourteenth
place. There was considerable disagreement within the work group
over the significance of potential adverse effects that may
arise from biotechnological changes.
On the one hand, biotechnology's potential damages were
regarded as small because of the absence of actual damages to
date and the likelihood that future damage would be remote.
On the other hand, it is recognized that a population of
living organisms may have unforeseen effects on plants and
animals, including humans, and since they can expand their
population through reproduction, the effects could be very
serious. For example, U.S agriculture depends on a limited
number of species of crops and livestock. Rapid genetic changes
introduced into the environment could have large adverse conse-
quences, conceivably even on the scale of a major loss of an
important crop, such as corn, or a blight similar to that caused
by the gypsy moth.
RECOMMENDATIONS
We have developed a set of recommendations on interpreting
the results of this work and on how to improve future efforts.
EPA Offices Should Intensify Their
Welfare Assessment Activities
In general, we were surprised by the scarcity of information
about the adverse welfare effects of many environmental problems.
Given the quantifiable nature of many types of welfare effects,
we expected to conduct a comprehensive assessment. However, many
offices at EPA have not undertaken even a rudimentary assessment
of the extent and the significance of the welfare effects their
regulatory programs seek to minimize.
7-11
-------
Rankings Should Be Viewed as Only a General Indication
of the Relative Severity of Welfare Effects
One consequence of this lack of systematic study is that
the information available to us varied substantially in qual-
ity and coverage. Thus, the ranking depends to a considerable
extent on the collective professional judgment of the work group,
A number of work group members expressed concern that the
results of this document may be applied too rigorously, partic-
ularly for the lower-ranked environmental problems, where the
lack of quantitative data was more pronounced. Thus, this
document should be viewed as a preliminary estimate by senior
managers at EPA of the relative magnitude and extent of wel-
fare risks from alternative environmental problems.
Research Should Continue on CO?/Global Warming
and Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
The magnitude of welfare effects from these two environmen-
tal problems is potentially enormous. However, substantial
uncertainty surrounds their potential effects. For example,
0 the long lead time before the impacts may occur allows
for social, political, and economic adjustments, espe-
cially if the impacts are evolutionary, rather than
catastrophic? and
0 the potential for positive as well as negative effects
suggests the potential for a distribution of wealth,
rather than welfare losses.
Given these and other uncertainties, we believe that cur-
rent research efforts to determine the nature of the problems
should be continued.
EPA Should Evaluate the Welfare
Effects of Noise Pollution
Work group members had different opinions about the relative
ranking of Other Air Pollutants, which is principally composed
of odor and noise pollution. Despite these differences, all the
members agree that EPA should evaluate the significance of noise
pollution.
Pesticide Effects Should Be Assessed Separately
We were uncomfortable with our inability to specifically
delineate what we believed to be the substantial welfare impacts
7-12
-------
of pesticide use. Separate data do not appear to exist. In-
formation provided to us was either presented in an aggregate
fashion by receptor (for example, for estuaries) or in an aggregate
fashion by source category (for example, discharges from nonpoint
sources). Thus, we believe that EPA should conduct research on
the welfare damages stemming exclusively from pesticides.
SPA Should Conduct More Research on the Use, Option,
and Existence Values of Protecting Ground Water
The environmental problems associated with ground-water
contamination were ranked lower than one might expect, given
EPA's attention to the problems. The assessment of these prob-
lems was influenced by the lack of research into effects, the
difficulty of assessing future use values of ground-water
resources, the desire of the public to maintain the option
of having pristine ground water (option value), and the value the
public places upon preserving pristine ground water, even if it
is never used (existence value). EPA should conduct more research
on the welfare effects of ground-water contamination, consider-
ing future use, option, and existence values to determine whether
this report has accurately portrayed such effects.
EPA Should Improve Technigues for Assessing
the Effects of Uncontrolled Biotechnology and
Other Unlikely Catastrophic Events
Evaluation of the effects of uncontrolled biotechnology
posed a problem somewhat different from those posed by other
environmental problems. While serious welfare impacts could be
postulated (e.g., permanent loss of a grain crop, such as corn)
the risk of occurrence was small and unguantified. Hence, we
based our judgment largely on the possibility of the release
of an undesirable agent with serious impacts. EPA needs to
explore more disciplined ways of collecting and evaluating
whatever information is available on this subject and integrate
this information into the its decision-making process.
Welfare Effects of Contaminated Drinking
Water Need to Be Better Quantified
The lack of information on the welfare effects of poor
guality drinking water was surprising, especially in light of
such obvious areas of public concern as objectionable tastes,
discoloration, or odors. This may be due to the health focus
this problem has received in the past. A broader focus on
effects to include welfare impacts in future research and
regulatory efforts may identify substantial welfare risks not
considered in this analysis.
7-13
-------
EPA Should Reassess Its Priorities to Better
Reflect the Severity of Welfare Effects
There appear to be serious discrepancies between the wel-
fare effects documented in this report and the deqree of atten-
tion that EPA currently qives particular environmental problems.
Environmental problems that have significant welfare effects
but have received comparatively less attention by EPA include:
0 Discharges from Nonpoint Sources to Surface Waters;
0 Other Air Pollutants (including noise and odors);
0 Other Pesticide Risks—leaching and runoff of pesti-
cides and agricultural chemicals, air deposition from
spraying, etc.; and
0 To Estuaries, Coastal Waters, and Oceans from All
Sources.
Concerns about a particular environmental problem and its asso-
ciated welfare effects does suggest that explicit consideration
of all environmental effects can improve EPA's prioriity-setting
process.
7-14
-------
APPENDIX A
References for the Welfare Work Group Report
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 2
Andrady, A. (1986). Analysis of Technical Issues Related to the
Effect of UV-B on Polymers. Draft final report prepared by
Research Triangle Institute for the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Washington, DC, March.
Beloin N., and F. Haynie (1975). Soiling of Building Materials.
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, Vol. 24,
p. 339. 1975
Cummings, R., H. Burness, and R. Norton (1981). Methods Develop-
ment for Environmental Control Benefits Assessment.
Volume V. "Measuring Household Soiling Damages from
Suspended Air Particulates, A Methodological Inquiry."
Draft report submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. January.
Horst, R. et al. (1986). A Damage Function Assessment of
Building Materials: The Impact of Acid Deposition, Report
prepared by Mathtech Inc., Washington, D.C.
Horst, R. et al. (1986). The Economic Impact of Increased UV-B
Radiation on Polymer Materials: A Case Study of Rigid
PCV. Draft final report prepared by Mathtech, Inc. for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. June.
Kennedy Engineers (1973). "Seattle Corrosion Study". Tacoma,
Washington.
Kennedy Engineers (1979). Internal Corrosion Study, Summary Re-
port. Conducted for the City of Seattle, Washington. Feb-
ruary.
Lefohn, A.S. (1984). "A Comparison of Ambient Ozone Exposure
for Selected Non-Urban Sites." Paper presented at the 77th
Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association,
San Francisco, CA. June 24-29. Manuscript number 84-104-1.
Lefohn, A. and R. Brocksen (1984). Acid Rain Effect Research -
A Status Report, Journal of the Air Pollution Control
Manuel, E.H., Jr. et al. (1982a). Benefits Analysis of Alterna-
tive Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Sulfur Dioxide and Total Suspended Particulates, Volume
II. Final Report prepared by Mathtech, Inc. for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Economic Analysis Branch,
Research Triangle Park, NC, August.
A-l
-------
Manual, E.H., Jr. et al. (1982b). Benefits Analysis of Alterna-
tive National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Sulfur
Dioxide and Total Suspended Particulates, Volume III.
Final report prepared by Mathtech, Inc. for U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Economic Analysis Branch, Research
Triangle Park, N.C., August.
Mathtech (1983). Benefits of Reduced Materials Damage Due to
Local Reductions in Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations: A
Six State Study. Report to EPA Office of Policy Analysis,
Washington, D.C., November.
Mathtech (1985a). Benefit-Cost Analysis of Industrial Boiler
New Source Performance Standards for Sulfur Dioxide.
Research Triangle Park, N.C. December.
Mathtech (1985b). The Effects of Sulfur Dioxide on Steel
Transmission Structures. Report to EPA, Office of Policy
Analysis, Washington, D.C. June.
McCarthy, E.F., Stankunas, J.E. Yocom, and D. Rae (1983).
Damage Cost Models for Pollution Effects on Material.
EPA report no. EPA-6003-84-012, Research Triangle
Park, N.C.
Merry, C.J. and P.J. LaPotin (1985). A Description of the
New Haven, Connecticut, Building Material Data Base.
U.S. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory,
Hanover, NH, Special Report Series.
Mueller, W.J. and P.B. Stickney (1970). A Survey and Economic
Assessment of the Effects of Air Pollution on Elastomers.
Report to National Air Pollution Control Administration
by Batelle Memorial Institute - Columbus Laboratories,
Columbus, OH.
National Research Council (NRC) (1976). Committee on Strato-
spheric Change. Halocarbons: Environmental Effects of
Chlorofluoromethane Release. National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, DC.
National Research Council (NRC) (1982). Causes and Effects of
Stratospheric Ozone Reduction: An Update. National Academy
of Sciences, Washington, DC.
Rae, D. (1984). Air Pollution Damages to Cultural Materials,
Draft report prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Policy Analysis, Washington, D.C., June.
A-2
-------
Association, 34:10, October. Boulder CO.
Resources for the Future (1984). Benefits Analysis of Alterna-
tive National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Photochemical
Oxidants. Report to EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Research Triangle Park, N.C., June.
Rowe, R.D., L.G. Chestnut, D.C. Peterson, C. Miller, R.M. Adams,
W.R. Oliver and H. Hogo (1986). The Benefits of Air Pollu-
tion Control in California. Report to the California Air
Resources Board, by Energy and Resource Consultants, Inc.,
Ryder, R.R. (1980). "The Costs of Internal Corrosion in Water
Systems". JAWWA, May.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1980). Air Quality
Criteria for Particulate Matter and Sulfur Oxides,
Volume III, Welfare Effects. External review draft,
Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Research
Triangle Park, N.C., April.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1982a). Air Quality
Criteria for Particulate Matter and Sulfur Oxides,
Volume II. Environmental Criteria and Assessment
Office, Research Triangle Park, N.C., December.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1982b). Air Quality
Criteria for Particulate Matter and Sulfur Oxides,
Volume III. Office of Research and Development,
Research Triangle Park, N.C., December.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1982c). Review of
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Sulfur
Dioxides: Assessment of Scientific and Technical
Information. Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, N.C., April.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1982d). Air Quality
Criteria for Oxides of Nitrogen. Office of Research and
Development, Research Triangle Park, NC, September.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1982e). Review of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Sulfur Dioxides:
Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information. Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC, April.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1985a). Costs and
Benefits of Reducing Lead In Gasoline: Final Regulatory
Impact Analysis. EPA, Office of Policy Analysis, Washington,
D.C., February.
A-3
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1985b). National Air
Quality and Emissions Trends Report, 1983. Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park,
N.C., April.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1985c). Preliminary
Benefit Cost Analysis for Regulatory Volatile Organic
Compound Air Emissions from Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities Managing RCRA Wastes. Economic
Analysis Branch, Research Triangle Park, N.C., July.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1985d). Draft Ozone
Criteria Document. Environmental Criteria and Assess-
ment Office, Research Triangle Park, N.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1986). Water Quality
Criteria for Lead. Environmental Assessment and Criteria
Office. March.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1986). Review of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Ozone: Preliminary
Assessment of the Scientific and Technical Information.
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC, March.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (undated). Regulatory
Impact Analysis on the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Sulfur Oxides, Partial Draft. Strategies
and Air Standards Division, Research Triangle Park, N.C.
Watson, W. and J. Jaksch (1982). Air Pollution: Household
Soiling and Consumer Welfare Losses, Journal of Environ-
mental Economic and Management, Vol. 9, No. 3, September.
Wisniewski, J. and E. Keitz (1981). Acid Rain Deposition
Patterns in the Continental United States. Submitted to
the Bulletin of the American Meteorology Society.
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 3
Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control
Administrators (1984). American Clean Water; The States'
Evaluation of Progress, 1972-82. February.
Baker, J.P., and Harvey, T.B. (1984), Critique of Acid Lakes
and Fish Population Status in the Adirondack Region of New
York State. Draft Final Report to the EPA for the NAPAP
Project E3-25.
A-4
-------
Currie, J.W., R.J. More, and J.R. Neese (1985). "Economic
Analyses: The National Acid Precipitation Program." Acid
Rain, ed. P. Mandelbaum.
Freeman, M.A. (1982), Air and Water Pollution Control; A Bene-
fit-Cost Assessment. New York: Wiley.
Keup, L.E. (1985). "Flowing Water Resources." Water Resources
Bulletin, April.
Mitchell, R.C., and R.T. Carson (1984). "Willingness to Pay for
National Freshwater Quality Improvements." Resources for
the Future, October (draft).
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1985). National
Ocean Service. "National Estuaries Inventory Data Atlas."
November.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (1981).
Final Report, New York Angler Survey, 1976-1977. Ray Brook
New York.
U.S. Department of Commerce (1983). Bureau of the Census. County
and City Data Book.
U.S. Department of the Interior (1983). National Park Service,
1982-1983 Nationwide Recreation Survey.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1986). Office of Marine
and Estuarine Protection. "Near Coastal Waters Strategic
Options Paper." June (draft).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1985). Office of Water
Regulations and Standards. "Preliminary Analysis of the
Benefits of Water Quality Improvements in Long Island Sound."
September (unpublished).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1985). Office of Water
Regulations and Standards. Monitoring and Data Support
Division. National Water Quality Inventory; 1984 Report
to Congress"EPA 440/4-85-029. August.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1982). National Survey of Needs
for Hatchery and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. November.
Vaughn, W.J., and Russell, C.S., (1982). Freshwater Recraetional
Fishing. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.
Vaughan, W.J., and Russell, C.S., (1983). Freshwater Recreational
Fishing The National Benefits of Water Pollution Control,
Resources for the Future, 1983.
A-5
-------
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4
Andersen, J.C., and A.P., Kleinman, eds. (1987). "Salinity
Management Options for the Colorado River." Utah State
University. June.
Calkins, J., and C.I. Keller (1984). "Solar UV and Its Impact
on Microorganisms in Aquatic Ecosystems." Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Crocker, T.D. and Foster, B.A. (1985). "Some Economic Implica-
tions of Alternative Biological and Chemical Explanations
of the Impacts of Acid Deposition on Forest Ecosystems."
Paper Presented at the International Symposium on Acid
Precipitation, Muskaka, Canada.
Callaway et al. (1985). "Economic Valuation of Acidic Deposition:
Preliminary Results from the 1985 NAPAP Assessment."
Draft paper by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Cumberland et al., 1982; Horst et al., 1986. Climatic Impact
Assessment Program Monograph 6. 1974. References on
stratospheric ozone depletion and the CO2 greenhouse effect
cited in fact sheets.
D'Arge, R.D., and V.K. Smith (1982). "Uncertainty, Information,
and Benefit-Cost Evaluation of CFC Management." In Cumber-
land et al. The Economics of Managing Chlorofluorocarbons,
Stratospheric Ozone and Climate Issues. Washington, D.C.:
Resources for the Future.
Environmental Research Laboratory (1984). "Economic Effects of
Ozone on Agriculture." Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development.
Forest Response Program (1986). "National Research Plan." U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Forest Service.
Harris, T., and J. Morris (1985). "Toxic Chemical Threatens
West." Sacramento (Cal.) Bee. Three-part series. September
Kopp, R.J., et al. (1985). "Implications of Environmental Policy
for U.S. Agriculture: The Case of Ambient Ozone Standards."
Journal of Environmental Management. Vol. 20, pp. 321-31.
London: Academic Press, Inc.
Mathtech, Inc. (1986). "Comparative Risks for Primary Air Pol-
lutants." Volume II. Prepared for the Economic Analysis
Branch and Air Standards Division, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Augus t.
A-6
-------
O'Mara, O.K., and R.R. Reynolds (1976). "Evaluation of the
Economic Consequences of Restricting Fishing Due to Kepone
Pollution in the James River, Virginia." Office of Pesticide
Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. February.
Rowe, R.D., et al. (1986). The Benefits of Air Pollution Control
in California. Report to the California Air Pollution Con-
trol Board. Boulder, Colorado: Energy and Resource Consul-
tants.
Teramura, A.H. (1986). "Overview of Our Current State of Know-
ledge of UV Effects on Plants." In U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Effects of Changes in Stratospheric
Ozone and Global Climate. Volume I. "Overview."
Teramura, A.H., and N.S. Murali (1985). "Current Risks and
Uncertanties of Stratospheic Ozone Depletion Upon Plants."
Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
U.S. Department of Commerce (1986). Bureau of Census, Statistical
Abstract of the United States.
U.S. Department of Commerce (1986). National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration, Fisheries of the United States.
U.S. Department of the Interior (1985). Task Group on Irrigation
Damage. "Preliminary Evaluation of Selenium Concentrations
in Ground and Surface Water, Soils, Sediment, and Biota
from Selected Areas in the Western United States." Decem-
ber.
Worrest, R.C. (1986). "The Effect of Solar UV-B Radiation on
Aquatic Systems: An Overview." In U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Effects of Changes in Stratospheric
Ozone and Global Climate. Volume I. "Overview."
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 5
BUG & Associates, Inc. (1986). "Location of Mines and Factors
Affecting Exposures. Draft report prepared for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste.
Cumberland et al. (1974). Climatic Impact Assessment Program.
Monograph 6.
Mathtech, Inc. (1986). Comparative Risks for Primary Air Pol-
lutants. Volume II. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Strategies and Air Standards Division, Economic
and Analysis Branch. August.
A-7
-------
Putnam, Hayes & Bartlett, Inc. (1985). Assessment of the Poten-
tial for Natural Resource Claims at Hazardous Waste Sites.
Final report prepared for the U.S.Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Policy Analysis.
Schulze et al. (1986). "A Case Study of a Hazardous Waste Site:
Perspectives from Economics and Psychology." Draft paper.
University of Colorado, Center for Economic Analysis. May.
Titus, J., and M. Earth (eds.) (1984). Greenhouse Effect and
Sea Level Rise; A Challenge for This Generation. New
York: Van Nostrand Rheinhold.
U.S. Coast Guard (1983). Polluting Incidents in and around U.S.
Waters, Calendar Years 1982 and 1983.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1986). Office of Solid
Waste. Background Paper for Options Selection for Revisions
to RCRA Subtitle D. September 5.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1985). Office of Solid
Waste. Wastes from the Extraction and Benefication of
Metallic Ores, Phosphate Rock, Asbestos Overburden from
Uranium Mining, and Oil Shale. Report to Congress.
REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 6
CEQ Annual Report, 1979, Chapter 9 (Noise).
Charles River Associates (1983). "Benefits of Reducing Odors
from Diesel Vehicles: Results of a Contingent Valuation
Survey." Draft final report prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Boston.
Chestnut, L.G., and R.D. Rowe (1983). "Integral Vista Benefits
Analysis." Report prepared for the National Park Service,
Air Quality Division. Denver, Colorado.
Copley International (1973). "A Study of the Social and Eco-
nomic Impacts of Odors." EPA Report Contract No. 68-02-0295.
February.
Mathtech, Inc. (1986). "Fine Particulates." Appendix VI in
Comparative Risks for Primary Air Pollutants. August.
Middleton, W.E.K. (1952). Vision Through the Atmosphere.
Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
OECD (1985). "Strengthening Noise Abatement Policy," August 23:
Scale 2.
A-8
-------
Rae, D.A. (1984). "Benefits of Visual Air Quality in Cincinnati:
Results of a Contingent Ranking Survey." Draft report for
Electric Power Research Institute by Charles River Associates,
August.
Randall, A., J.P. Hoehn, and G.S. Tolley (1981). "The Structure
of Contingent Markets: Some Results of a Recent Experiment."
Paper presented at the American Economics Association
Meeting, Washington, D.C. December 30.
Rowe, R.D., et al. (1986). "The Benefits of Air Pollution Control
in California." Report to the California Air Resources
Board, by Energy and Resource Consultants, Inc. Boulder,
Colorado.
Rowe, R.D., and L.G. Chestnut (1986). "Visibility Benefits in
California: Applying the Research to Policy Alternatives."
Paper presented at APCA Speciality Conference, Grand Teton
National Park. September.
Shulze, W.D., D.S. Brookshire, E.G. Walther, and K. Kelley (1981).
Methods Development for Environmental Control Benefits
Assessment. Volume VIII. The Benefits of Reserving
Visibility in the National Park Lands of the Southwest.
Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Tolley, G., et al. (1985). Establishing and Valuing the Effects
of Improved Visibility in the Eastern United States. Wash-
ington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Development.
Trijonis, J. (1982). "Visibility in California." Journal of
the Air Pollution Control Association 32 February :
165-169.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1986). Summary Fact Sheet
for Noise.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1986). Miscellaneous
work sheets prepared for the Comparative Risk Project.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1985). Developing
Long-Term Strategies for Regional Haze; Findings and
Recommendations of the Visibility Task Force. Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina.
A-9
------- |