FINAL REPORT
VOLUME I: SIMULATION AND ANALYSIS
THE OAP REGIONAL ECONOMIC MODEL UTILIZATION
PHASE I
Prepared for:
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Programs
Research Triangle Park
North Carolina
January 7, 1972
-------
FINAL REPORT
VOLUME I: SIMULATION AND ANALYSIS
THE OAP REGIONAL ECONOMIC MODEL UTILIZATION
PHASE I
Prepared for:
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Programs
Research Triangle Park
North Carolina
Prepared by:
T. R. Lakshmanan, F. Lo, and R.
CONSAD Research Corporation
121 North Highland Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15206
Byrne
January 7, 1972
-------
(-
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The research reported here was carried out by CONSAD Research
Corporation under the overall direction of T. R. Lakshmanan.
Fu-chen Lo was the principal investigator of the effort.
Robert J.
Anderson and Robert F. Byrne contributed significantly to the effort.
In the preparation of this report, CONSAD has relied heavily on
the advice and guidance of Allen Basala. the project officer.
Othe r
EPA staff members who provided valuable guidance during the various
phases of the project a.re Ron Campbell, John O'Connor. Paul Gerhardt,
and Ken Woodcock.
To all of these individuals. grateful acknowledg-
ment is made.
Any opinions comprised in this report are those of CONSAD and
do not necessarily reflect the views of the individuals cited above.
il
ii
-------
r
;1
::1
TABLE OF CONTNETS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
........
CHAPTER 2: IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES:
APPROACH AND SPECIFICATION
.......
A. Legislative -Administrative Context
of Air Pollution Control. . . . . . . . . . .
B. Dimensions of an Implementation Strategy. . .
C. The Alternative Strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER 3: CONTROL COSTS AND
ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS.
Page
1
9
10
13
27
. . . .
. . . .
. . . 31
A. Control Cost Estimate s . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B. Benefit Estimates. . . . . . ... . . . . . .
C. Economic Projections. . . . . . . . . . . .
D. Note on Simulation of Strategies. . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER 4: ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF
SELECTED STRATEGIES
. . . . fI
. . . . . .
A. Measures of Economic Effects
of Implementation Strategie s . . . . . . . . . . . .
B. Total Net Effects of Alternative Strategies
C. Comparative Analysis of the
Alternative Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . .
D. Geographical Patterns of Economic Effects. . . . .
E. The "Mixed" Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F. Summing Up . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER 5:: APPLICATION TO WATER POLLUTION
AND SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL. . . . .
. . . .
A. Salient Feature s of Wate r Quality
and Solid Waste Management. . . '.' . . . . . . .
B. Required Model Extensions. . . . . . . . . . . . .
C. Extant Models and Available Data. . . . . . . ... .
D. Proposed Application of the OAP
Economic Model System. . . . . . . . . . .
iii
31
36
39
43
57
59
62
73
80
100
105
107
107
110
114
120
-------
Table of Contents (continued)
CHAPTER 6: REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Simulation and Accuracy. . . . . ... . . . . . .
Policy Simulation and
Government Sector. . .
Inve stme nt Func tion . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .
Treatment of Benefits. . . .
A.
B.
C.
D.
A PPENDIX A:
APPENDIX B:
APPENDIX C:
APPENDIX D:
. . . . .
. . . .
. . . . . .
.......
A Selective Survey of Recent Studie s of the
Economics of Water Quality and Solid Waste
Management
Five Key Economic Indicators of 91 AQCRs
Under A lternative Strategies for 1975 or 1976
Regions of Concentration of Key High Emis-
sion Industrie s. .
Convergence Process for Estimated Values
Without Pollution Controls
iv
Page
127
128
136
139
140
-------
Figure 2. 1:
Table 2. 1:
Table 3.1:
Table 3.2:
Table 3.3:
Table 3.4:
Table 3.5:
Figure 3.1:
Figure 3.2:
Figure 4. 1:
Table 4. 1:
Table 4.2:
Table 4. 3:
Table 4.4:
Table 4.5:
Table 4.6:
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Control Costs for the Manufacturing
Industry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A Summary Table of Seven Alternative
Strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
National Emission Reductions by Major
Source Categories 'which Reflect the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards of Clean Air
Amendments of 1970 .........................
National Percentage Reduction of Industrial
Process Emission by Industry by Pollutant. . . . .
Cost Estimation of 312(a) Report. . . .. . .. . .. ...
Control Cost Estimates of 91 AQCRs Under
Straight Implementation by 1975. .. . .. . .. ... .. .
Control Cost Estimates of 91 AQCRs Under
Two- Year Extended Implementation by 1977 . . . .
Cost and Benefit Distribution Over Imple-
mentation Period 1973-1977 ..................
Example of Economic Projection with OBE
Estimate s. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . .
Three- Year Straight Implementation 1973-
1975 Without Government Financial Assistance.
Aggregate Economic Effects on 91 AQCRs
Measured by Five Key Variables Under Stra-
te gy 1 ......................................
Aggregate Economic Effects on 91 AQCRs
Measured by Five Key Variables Under Stra-
te gy Z ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Aggregate Economic Effects on 91 AQCRs
Measured by Five Key Variables Under Stra-
te gy 3 ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Aggregate Economic Effects on 91 AQCRs
Measured by Five Key Variables Under Stra-
tegy 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Aggregate Economic Effects on 91 AQCRs
Measured by Five Key Variables Under Stra-
tegy 5 ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Aggregate Economic Effects on91 AQCRs
Measured by Five Key Variables Under Stra-
t e g y 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . .', . . . . . . . . .
v
Page
16
30
32
33
34
37
38
40
42
60
64
65
66
67
68
69
-------
Table 4.7:
Table 4.8:
Figure 4. 1:
Figure 4.2:
Figure 4. 3:
Figure 4.4:
Table 4. 9:
Table 4. 10:
Table 4.11:
Table 4.12:
Table 4. 13:
Table 4. 14:
Table 4.15:
Table 4.16:
Figure 4. 7:
List of Illustration (continued)
Frequency Distribution of Major Variables
for AQCRs (Strategies 1 through 4) .""""'"
Frequency Distribution of Major Variables
for AQCR s (Strategie s 5 and 6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Geographic Distribution of Economic Effects
in 1975 Measured by Change of Unemployment
Rate: Strategy 1 .............................
Geographic Distribution of Economic Effects
in 1976 Measured by Change of Unemployment
Rate: S t rate g y 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Geographic Distribution of Economic Effects
in 1975 Measured by Change of Unemployment
Rate: S t rate g y 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Geographic Distribution of Economic Effects
in 1976 Measured by Change of Unemployment
Rate: Strategy 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Percent Change in Unemployment of Selected
AQCR sUnde r Alte rnative Strategie s ..........
Percent Change in Manufacturing Production
(Value-added) of Selected AQCRs Under Al-
ternative Strategie s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Percent Change in Manufacturing Investment
of Selected AQCRs Under Alternative Strategies.
Percent Change in Regional Personal Income of
Selected AQCR s Under Alternative Strategie s ..
Percent Change in Local Government Revenue
of Selected AQCRs Under Alternative Strategies.
Comparison of Regions with Manufacturing Pro-
duction Decreased 2 Percent or More in 1975
or 1976. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Comparisons of Manufacturing Investment
Showing a 15 Percent or Greater Decrease
in 1975 or 1976.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Comparisons of Regions with Personal Income
Dec rease 1 Percent or More in 1975 or 1976 ...
Regions with Manufacturing Production De-
creased 2 Percent or More in 1975 or 1976 .....
vi
Page
74
78
81
82
83
84
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
-------
Figure 4.8:
Figure 4.9:
Figure 4. 10:
Table 4. 17:
Table 4.18:
Figure 5. 1:
Table 5. 1:
Table 5.2:
Table 5. 3:
Figure 5.2:
Figure 5.3:
Figure 6. 1:
Table 6. 1:
List of Illustrations (continued)
Page
Regions with Manufacturing Inve stment
Decreased 15 Percent of More in 1975
or 1976 ............:.......................
96
Regions with Personal Income Decreased.
1 Percent or More in 1975 or 1976.............
The Emergence of Manufacturing Belt
Urban Ce nte r s, 1870 ........................ 99
Grouping of AQCRs Under Mixed Strategy...... 102
Economic Indicators Under "Mixed"
97
Strategy, 1976.............................. 104
Regional Waste Generation and Evaluation
Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 115
Water Intake by Purpose, Gross Water Used
and Water Discharged, 1968.................. 117
Industrial Waste Water Discharge and Esti-
mated BODs in 1968 ......... ................ 118
Cost Estimates of Clean Water by Major
Manufacturing Industry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 119
Proposed Modification of the OAP Economic
Model System for Water and Solid Waste and
Solid Waste Pollution Control Simulation. . . . . . . ,122
Proposed Modification for the Regional Model.. 124
Projection of Regional Personal Income in
Pittsburgh AQCR with and without control of
A ir Pollution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 132
Comparison of Estimated and Actual Values
of Personal Income, 1967 .................... 134
vii
-------
. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND SUMMAR Y
CONSAD Research Corporation has developed and demonstrated
a Regional Economic Model for the assessment of the effects of air
pollution abatement. ):' This model is operational and policy oriented and
. attempts to describe the economic system-wide effects of specific air
pollution strategies in 91 major metropolitan areas in the United States.
Essentially, the model is a cross-sectional Key:nesian-type
regional macro model that describes in considerable detail, the
two-digit SIC manufacturing industries, viewed as leading regional
economic growth.
The Keynesian system and economic base theory
are integrated in the regional income dete rmination block of the
model that describes regional personal income, consumption ex-
penditures and local government expenditures and revenues.
In
a?dition, there is a regional labor market block, that specifies
,.
the employment, unemployment and labor force equations.
Finally,
* CONSAD Research Corporation, An Economic Model
System for the Assessment of Effects of Air Pollution Abatement,
Development and Demonstration Phase, prepared for the Office
of Air Pollution, Environmental Protection Agency, May 15, 1971.
1
-------
the model describes the regional electricity and fuel demand patterns
by the two-digit SIC industries.
The regional model is hooked up to
a National Input-Output Model (1963) via a Regional Share (location
quotient) matrix.
The 1-0 system is intended to serve as an external
market for the regional economy and to measure the structural
change in the national economy attendant on air pollution control in
the regions.
The 'regional model was estimated using 1967 data for the 91
largest Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, using ordinary
least squares except for the income block for which two stage
least squares was used.
The operationality of this model was demonstrated in the
effort described in May 1971, report.
In that demonstration, the
economic effects of the control costs as sociated with the reductions
in emissions required by Section 305 (a) of the Clean Air Act of
1967 on the 91 SMSAs were simulated.
Specifically, three strate-
gies reflecting the same control costs but different in their incidence
of these costs among industries, consumers and government were
simulated.
These simulation results suggested the need for further model
utilization experiments that would lead to a more thorough utilization
of the model than was possible in the development and demonstration
2
-------
phase.
The resulting model utilization effort, termed Phase I, is
the theme of this report.
The Phase I model utilization effort has been structured into
a set of tasks.
The first task was addressed to a specification of air pollution
control implementation strategies that introduce a greater realism
to the model utilization and can lead to a more thorough exercise
of the model than was possible in the demonstration phase.
:B.ealism is introduced in a variety of ways.
First, the
standards and costs used in the strategies are the preliminary esti-
. .
mates corresponding to the control implied by Clean Air Amendment
of 1970, provided by EPA.
These estimates are termed as EPA cost
estimates in the rest of the report.
Second, since control implementation would take place over
a period extending to 1975 or 1977, the simulation includes the
regional economie s for the corres ponding future years and the
incidence of control costs over time is assumed to be a "step up"
function (with the greatest proportion of the investments occurring
closer to 1975 or 1977) rather than a uniform annual expenditure
over the period, as assumed in the demonstration simulation
(May 15, 1971). Since the EPA administrator can extend the period
of implementation by two years under certain circumstances,
3
-------
strategies can also differ by implementation periods.
Further, the
economies of the AQCRs (Air Quality Control Regions) are likely to.be
larger in 1973-1975 than in 1967, and with a more realistic time scheme
of cost incidence as proposed here, the proposed strategies are likely
to be more realistic.
Third, a greater variety of schemes are tried in the strategies.
According to Wilson and Minnotte, >:< several existing federal and state
provisions act to reduce the cost to industry of air pollution.
Included
here are the Federal Corporate Tax, depreciation allowances, invest-
ment credit and State and local tax laws.
These provisions give govern-
ment assistance to industry amounting to as much as 59% of cost, under
certain as sumptions.
The OAP model parameters estimated in 1967 .
will reflect the assistance provided the firms in all industries actively
instituted control at that time.
Thus, when a strategy calls for finan-
cial assistance. it implies additional cost sharing.
Fourth, alternative levels of "netll benefits of air pollution con-
trol are assumed.
The institution of air control will result in in-
crease s of productivity, prope rty value s, control device production
and decreases in health expenditures, housing maintenance, etc.
The
>:
-------
.-- -" -_...~-~--._-,"._.-_.._..-._.'-~-'--'--_._--'._'
"- - ..,,;.-."'_.--.-;-_.._._-~-"-.
" .~-.._.........~,;;;;,_..:.-_----."
" ,-~,........,' ...-... .;::;,.. - -.-
level of increment of national final demand resulting from such
change s is termed here as "net" benefits.
Estimates of "net" bene-
fits are hard to come by and two levels are assume'd for the simu-
lation.
Six strategies are developed in the light of the above dimensions
-- time period of implementation, cost sharing and level of net bene-
fits -- for simulation with the OAP model.
A seventh strategy, termed
as the "mixed" strategy evolves out of the simulation and imp lemen-
tation of the above six. and is best described later.
The second task was essentially a quantification of the strategies
and updating of economic data in a manner to simulate strategies such
as those developed in this st:udy.
Since the strategies assum.e the
implementation of Clean Air Amendments of 1970, the control costs
used are the EPA preliminary estimates reflecting the emission re-
duction levels deemed appropriate to meet Clean Air Amendments
air quality standards.
To facilitate the use of the model over the implementation
period, a number of future cross-sections of the regional economies.
were developed.for the 91 AQCRs using the OBE regional forecasts. ):'
):'. U. S. Department of Commerce, Office of Business Econo-
mics, Economic Projections for Air Quality Control Regions, June,
1970.
5
-------
The simulation procedures of the OAP Model were adopted to
accommodate the overtime and cumulation effects of the strategies
in Phase 1.
The third task of the Phase I effect was to apply the model to
simulate and assess the economic consequences of the three
strategies.
As air pollution control requirements are instituted in the
nation, the consequent effects are incident differentially in the
various AQCRs.
The primary purpose of regional economic model-
ing is to provide quantitative estimates of such differences among
the AQCRs in any particular treatment (strategy) and among different
treatments.
The second purpose of the model is to provide information on .
such differences among regions and among strategies that is useful
to determine implementation strategies.
For example, it is
possible to argue that the "perfect" strategy is one in which each
AQCR suffers the same degree of economic hardship.
Exact measure-
ment of such a condition is impossible, since there is no single
measure of economic hardship.
However, the use of this regional
model permits useful estimation of the degree of differences in the
treatment of AQCRs necessary to achieve some degree of uniformity
in the effects of implementation of pollution control requirements.
6
-------
. "--., _._~ ,----",-~'--'-'--'5.,_,,,,,__,_,,,,,,'~--"""'~~"~ ,--,,-;'_. .,,;,.. .;;:.~~ '"';;~"-1" ~ ,--:-;:-,-:-:,,;'-;;;"'.':'~= - - '-:""~:--=-----:-:.". ~ --~~~~ 4
,~A.,;, -----
Even, if spatial equity were not pursued as a major goal, the EPA
administrator has the option of extending implementation period by
two years under certain circumstances.
Other forms of targeted
assistance (differential cost sharing, etc.) are also possible.
Conse -
quently, the regional model can be used to design and assess such
"mixed'1 implementation strategies (in which different AQCRs are
treated differently) by trial and error, so that some guidance may be
available to EP A officials to achieve some degree of equity among
AQCRs in control implementation.
Thus, the effort to assess the economic effects air pollution
control strategies is guided by these two objective s.
The aggregate, over time and geographic patterns of economic
effects in the 91 AQCRs are explored in the six strategies.
The rea-
sons behind the geogr!1phic patterns of adverse economic effects such
as the locational factors, industrial structure and economic history are
explored in some depth.
The re sulting insights are utilized in the de-
sign of a "mixed" strategy that reduces the degree of economic adver-
sity of control ,(to an arbitrary level of 0.5% unemployment increase)
for all AQCR s.
The search for a mixed strategy is then an effort to-
wards equity among AQCRs in the economic effects of implementation.
7
-------
;,....., " .'-""*k..:' .- ~ ~ . ".~. ..
". ....-...
The fourth task is addressed to an exploration of the potential
for and the modifications necessary for the extension of the OAP model
to other media -- water and land -- of pollution.
The se extensions are
suggested in the light of the similarities and differences among air qual-
ity, water quality and solid waste practices and available data.
The
modifications and extensions of the model are outlined in some detail.
The fifth task identifies the potential areas for model refinement
and extension prior to ~llrthe r application.
These areas include elabor-
ation of the public sector in the model and reestimation of the invest-
ment equations.
8
-------
CHAPTER 2: IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES:
APPROACH AND SPECIFICATION
This chapter is directed to an identification of a set of air pollu-
tion control implementation strategie s, which are plaus ible in the cur-
rent legislative and administrative context, and whose economic effects
can be assessed by the OAP Regional Economic Model.
The implemen-
tation strategies will be designed to encompass the range of regulatory
and advisory responsibilities of EPA, >;, and be plausible under the con-
straints of administration, timing of implementation, finance, manner
of attainment, etc.
The specification of an air pollution control implementation strat-
egy can be viewed usefully in three sequential steps:
The identification of the range of variables defining
the regulatory and advisory responsibilities of EPA
in implementing air pollution control,
The grouping of the above variables into a few key
concepts that define major dimensions of imple-
mentation strategies, and
The design of a number of implementation strategies
by assigning values to these dimensions in terms of
interest to EPA staff and specifiable with the data
available.
>:'The legislative and administrative context of these responsibil-
ities are derived from the Clean Air Amendments of 1970 and EP A,
"Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, -and Submittals of Imple-
mentation Plans, II Federal Register, August 14, 1971.
9
-------
The chapter opens with an identification of the range of strategic
variables that define the responsibilities of EPA air pollution control.
It proceeds to a recognition of the key dimensions of implementation
strategies that encompass the strategic variables.
Next, each of these
dimensions is explored in some depth.
Finally, it presents a set of
implementation strategies designed in the light of the previous discus-
sion and data available for specifying strategies.
A.
Legis lative -Administrative Context
of Air Pollution Control
The legislative and administrative context of air pollution
control is largely dictated by the Clean Air Amendments of 1970.
They require the Administrator to adopt a strategy which provides
for:
t-' ~.
L"::
. - L .
adoption and implementation of national primary
ambient air quality standards,
adoption and implementation of secondary ambient
air quality standards,
adoption and implementation of performance
standards for new sources,
adoption and implementation of emis sion standards
for hazardous pollutants,
standards for vehicular emissions,'
adoption and implementation of standards for
aircraft emis sions,
10
-------
. ,
- . ".-"-..-- -_.".~. "'......~........, -'.
H . ,'-. . ,.,..:..:..._~ ..~..-._....~-'... .1--.-.-
.... .-4-,l....- ~.o.
regulation of motor fuels and additives,
[,
support and conduct research and development
activities,
regulations for certification of eligibility for
rapid write -off under Tax Reform Law of 1969,
grants to state and local governments, and
regulation of fuels.
In addition to these generic strategic variables for which EPA is
directly responsible, EPA retains an important advisory capacity in
many other matters:
advising. Treasury, Commerce, CEA, and CEQ
on matters pertaining to the economics of the
environment,
advising FPC on natural gas and electric power
policy,
advising AEC on nuclear power policy,
advising Interior on coal and oil policy, and
advising Corps of Engineers on effects of per-
mits to dump under the Refuse Act of 1899.
In particular, the National Ambient Air Quality Standards were
established within one month of enactment of the Clean Air Amend-
ments of 1970 for pollutants for which criteria had previously been
issued and are to be established simultaneously with issuance of cri-
teria docum.ents in the future.
Under this proviso, standards have al-
ready been established for sulfur oxides, particulates, carbon mon-
11
-------
oxide s. hydr ocarbons. and photochemical: oxid~mtsc.
Forea'ch'.p:ollutant
for which standards are established. the:r.e will, be. a-.primary_ambient
air quality standard, set at a level of air: quality'adequate7to:p:rotect.
public health. and a secondary ambient: air:
-------
Timing specified by law for standards promulgation and imple-
mentation planning specifies that final standards shall be designated
90 days after proposal, that states shall have nine months for imple-
mentation planning from the data of such final adoption, and that EPA
shall have four months from date of receipt to pass on a state's plan.
Given the complexity and the variety of strategic variable s,
it is clear that the key concepts to group these variables are required
before implementation strategies can be developed.
The development
of four such organizing concepts or dimensions of implementation
strategies is the theme of the next section.
B.
Dimensions of an Implementation Strategy
Four dimensions are recognized here as key to specification of
a strategy for simulation through the OAP Regional Economic Model.
They are:
. Time scheme of implementation
Cost -- air quality standard relations
Abatement incentive schemes.
Treatment of benefits
1.
Time Scheme of Implementation
It is dear that the three simulation runs in the Development and
Demonstration Phase>:' provided valuable insight into the spatial aspects
* CONSAD Research Corporation, op. cit., Volume I, May 15, 1971.
13
-------
of economic impacts of air pollution control strategies.
For example,
under Strategy I ("Industry Pays"), while the unemployment increase
aggregated over 91 AQCRs was 0.43, seven AQCRs exhibited more
than two percent increase and one as high as eight percent.
However, these strategies provided no clue to over-time imple-
mentation impacts of these strategies.
The Clean Air Amendments of
1970 provide for a flexibility in the implementation of the national
ambient air quality standards.
Specifically, a two-year extension
the deadline can be approved by the EPA upon application bya .
governor.
EPA can either adapt a "straight implementation' I strategy which
requires all AQCRs to meet the standards by 1975, or an "extended
implementation" strategy which gives a two-year extension.
Thus, in assessing implementation strategies, over time impacts
are of as much interest as geographic impacts.
One criterion that
may be used to grant extension of two years may be the degree of eco- .
nomic adversity likely to result from implementation.
To facilitate
the assessment of such cases, it may be useful to consider a set of
"mixed implementation" strategies.
Such strategie s would give the
AQCRs that were seriously adversely affected extended implementation
.
and other AQCRs straight or modified implementation time schemes.
." -.---....-,..--.............. - ~.
......-""-
~'..
14
-------
2.
Cost-Standards Relations
One of the basic problems in specification of strategies is the
lack of information on the technical relations between standards and
corresponding estimates of costs to attain these standards.
A survey
of available cost data shows that there are two major sources of con-
trol cost estimate s: one is the 1970 305 (a) Report which gives control
costs by AQCR by year from 1971 to 1975.
This would permit a year-
by-year simulation based on the standards and cost estimates provided
in that report (a five-year average cost was used in the three trial
simulations reported in the May 15, 1971, report).
The second source
will be the preliminary control cost estimates provided by EPA.
The
cost estimates reported in this document reflect the standards implied
by the Clean Air Amendments of 1970 by major high emission indus-
tries at the national level.
Those total control costs consist of (1) investment cost, and (2)
annual cost.
The former includes upgrading existing facilities and in-
stallation of equipment for new sources, while the latter is the sum of
operating and maintenance costs, interest expenditures and deprecia-
tion.
For example, the over-time expenditure for the manufacturing
industry is given in Figure 2. 1.
In general, there will be considerable
investment expenditures in the second and third year of implementation
15
-------
:rtg~re ? ~ t
Contt~~ C!J~ts ~~r th~ M~~qf~~~q+ing +mh~~ttY
I
,\
I
}
~
j
'!
:~
,
}
i i
,
~ ..-
P'
J
}
! '
.,
:~,
'1
,
/,
1 (~RHH~~~
1 .
I
I
/
/
I
/
I
I
I
/'
~ I
// /
./" /
/" _.-
-
-
- .
-
\
\
Total Cost
'I ..I ,I ( ..: I
fT
~3 '
2
- -,
-
-- ,
- ,
\
\
, .-'
-"-
.-" \
./ \
\
,
\
'.
Annual Cost
./
./
./
./
\
, .
Investment Cost
./
./
../
,/
--
. .---.' ---- .
.-
, ~
I
1 9 7'3
I
1~74
-- -..I
1.975
. l
1976
I
1 9 7 7..
{,
. ,"1
, 1
.'
-------
given a three-year implementation period (1973-1975).
Thus, if the
"extended implementation' I strategy were to be considered (1973-1977),
the expenditures in the second and third year may be "stretched" for
selected industries for those AQCRs which show the most serious nega-
tive effects of implementation.
3.
Abatement Incentive Schemes
After the specification of cost-standard relations, and the time
scheme of implementation, a major domain of strategy definition is ,
the scheme of incentives to encourage abatement activities.
The in-
centives fall under two broad categories:
Cost sharing incentive s, and
Economic or profit motive incentives. ):<
Cost sharing incentives are provisions at the Federal, state,
and local level that subsidize industry's cost of controlling pollution.
*These incentives have been explored at length in a number of
articles, books, and reports. Some useful recent work is the fol-
lowing: (a) Gerhardt, Paul H., "Incentives to Air Pollution Control, "
Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 33, No.2, 1968; (b) Wilson,
Richard D., and Minnotte, David W., "Government Industry Co.st
Sharing for Air Pollution Control, ',' Journal of Air Pollution Control
Association, Vol. 19, October, 1969; (c) Institute of Public Adminis-
tration, Government Approaches to Air Pollution Control, prepared
for OAP, EPA, July 15, 1971; and (d) ABT.Associates, "Incentives
to Industry for Water Pollution Control, " A report to FWPCA,
Washington, D. C., 1967.
17
-------
EEonomic incentives are financial measures that provide decisive in-
ducements for at least some firms to apply techniques for the control
oLalr pollution.
For these firms, pollution control should be at least
ascprofitable as other possible investments.
Both types of incentives
can. be and often are used in conjunction.
a.
Cos t-Sharing Incentive s
The defining characteristic of cost-sharing schemes is that high
emission industries share the cost of pollution control partly with
other sectors.
Examples are:
Rapid write-offs
Investment tax credits
Tax exemptions
Loans and loan guarantee s
Grants
Rapid write-offs, also known as accelerated depreciation, are
pe:rmitted by the Internal Revenue to recover the cost of capital.
When
firms use accelerated rather than straightline depreciation for tax
purposes, the difference in tax liability acts as an interest-free loan
to.the firm installing control equipment.
Rapid write-offs are avail-
able at the Federal and state level.
In general, this scheme favors
larger and more profitable firms, though the associated paper and
administrative work is quite considerable.
Investment tax credits are offered to offset the expenditures on
control equipment.
These can be subtracted from either taxes or gross
18
-------
revenue s.
Tax credit laws have been changed more frequently than de-
preciation (e. g., 7 percent tax credit for investment available up to
October, 1966, repealed, reinstated in 1967 and repealed again in
1969 and being reinstated in 1971).
Tax credits, consequently, typi-
cally provide only temporary incentives to the extent that repeal of tax
credits is foreseen.
They act as an incentive to make expenditure s
earlier than would otherwise be the case.
Exemptions are available for equipment from personal income
taxes, property taxes, sales and excise taxes, or some combination
therefore are available for pollution control equipment.
However, the
extent to which the overall effect of these provisions would reduce the
cost of pollution equipment appears to be quite limited. >:<
Government loans and loan guarantees make funds available at
subsidized interest rates and borrowing easier by providing funds to
firms that do not have any easy access to commercial lending sources.
This will appeal more to the marginal firm than to a firm with a good
financial situation.
To the government, costs are largely administra-
tive and risk insurance.
Grants are available for planning and demonstration purposes to
localities and governments.
.. .
* See Institute of Public Adminstration, op. cit.
19
-------
All of the above cost sharing methods tend to have the following
faults and advantage s in common.
The major emphasis is on capital
expansion for pollution abatement, when, in many cases, changes in
operations or basic production processes would greatly decrease the
quantity of emissions and therefore costs incurred by the firms.
In
essence, without carefully controlled research, these types of incen-
tives would jeopardize an efficient allocation of control resources.
Also. these incentives do not encourage cooperation among various
firms in the same air shed area. which could lead to economies of
scale in certain control areas and an increase in knowledge about con-
trol techniques.
Lastly, all of these policies have hidden government
revenue losses.
Since most control equipment will not bring about
future income for the firms. the government will not be able to recu-
perate losses by taxing the revenues from the investments.
Howeve"r.
the government will be able to tax the profits of the Air Pollution
Control Equipment Industry.
There.are, however. two major advantages of cost sharing in-
centives.
First, the administration of all the policies can be handled
through existing structures, thereby greatly decreasing administrative
costs and allowing more of the funds to filter down to the firms.
Sec-
ondly, this method allows for differential levels of incentives for dif-
ferent firms and/ or incentive s.
Cost sharing incentives could be used
20
-------
to encourage spreading the costs, of c:onh:ol over.broader~time' p.eriods ~
by encouraging control in one industry or: ar.ea;.. at" a:. time-.. :Eor~'instance,
heavy polluters might be e.nc'ouraged'. vffr.T r..apid-lyto: invest:in'.control'.
methods while lighter p.olluter-s: would. not: be enc:ourag.ed:untiLcloser~to'
the deadline in. 1977~
Hopefully, this: w.ould~ kee:p: pr:ice.s.: oLcontrol "in.;.-
puts down by anowing res:ources' to: be, channeled~ to" the.~ de'Velop.rn:ent. 'of:
specific types of control technology-..
b.
Economic or Profit. Motive:: Inc.entive:s-
Economic incentives provide' the. neces'sa:r.y'profit'motive' in:'in,..-
fiuencing the actions of industry.. Unlike. c:os:t: shar.ing; s.chem.e.s,; . there_is =
no need for supplemental inducements.
Economic incentives. can be: clas:s'ified' into: tw.o hr:oad:..categories:.>:<
Those based on surrogate s for.' pollution,. eo. .g:. ,
a. tax. on sulfur content of.. power. plant fue Is.
serving as a. substitute for. a tax. on". pollution'.
its:elf. Other' examples:' s.ubs-idie.s:, tax:on.
lead, tax on. electricity,' etc..
Those based on ern:is'sions. per' se, e:.. g'., a.:o
system of emis sion. char.ge s.
Emission reduction subsidies' are' an: example. of surrog!'tte type
and are payments made to pollute"rs: who have. de'cr.eased-::the.:arnount."of:'
::< See IPA, op.. cit.. ,. p. .7-4..
~l
-------
erpissions from their firms, according to the actual amount of the de-
crease.
Such a policy is expensive and allows the, total cost of cleaning
the air to fall on the public.
Taxes on sulfur content of power plant fuels are considered to be
relatively easier to administer than charges based on emissions.
Such
taxe s require taxe s to be based on inputs whose sulfur content leve Is
are easier to measure than emission level measurement required in
the previous case. >:<
An excellent example of the emission category of incentives is
the emission charges or the pollution tax.
The process involves a
firm being fined or taxed on the amount of pollutant it emits.
In
theory, the firm will reduce pollution to the point where marginal
abatement costs are equal to or less than the marginal emission tax
rate.
The emissions charge consists of ascertaining the pollution
potential for a firm (maximum), and then, by determining the actual
levels of emissions from the operations of the firm, and calculating
actual emissions based on the level of operations of the firm.
Once
this is accomplished, a charge can be levied against the firm.
To
clarify this idea, suppose there exists a tax on sulfur emissions.
S,tudies could ascertain the amount of potential sulfur emissions from
* For a detailed discussion of these points, see, Robert M. Solow,
"The Economist's Approach to Pollution and Its Control, II Science,
Volume 173, August 6, 1971.
22
-------
a fuel used in the production process.
A t the end of a stated period
of time, the amount of fuel consumed could be recorded and the amount
of sulfur emissions by the firm determined, and the appropriate fine
carried out.
If,. however, there exists some form of pollution control,
the efficiency of the device could be measured and, again, based on
this and the amount of fuel used, the quantity of sulfur emitted could
be estimated.
A specific incentive strategy may include some combination of
emission charges, tax credit or rapid write-offs for control devices.
Each such combination w ill suggest a particular cost sharing scheme
or distribution of incidence among consumers, producers and the public
sector.
Any given cost sharing scheme will greatly affect the pattern'
of economic impacts among different AQCRs.
Whatever cannot be passed on must be shared between those in-
dustries and government.
It has been estimated that the government as-
sistance to the industries through accelerated depreciation investment,
tax credits, government loans, direct and in the form of grants and
technical assistance, etc. ~ amount.s to as much as 59 percent of the
cost of air pollution. ~:<
~'< Wilson, Richard D. ,
that 59 percent percent of the
of the government.
and David W. Minnotte, op. cit., reported
control cost was shared by different leve Is
23
-------
L--
Wilson and Minnotte indicate that existing federal and state
provisions act to share the cost of air pollution control to industry.
These include federal corporate income ta:x, depreciation allowance s,
investment credits, Small Business Administration loans, Economic
Development Administration, and state tax laws.
Maximally, these
provisions share as much as 59 percent of the cost.
These estimates
include 53.6 percent as a result of reduced tax liabilities associated
with cash expens.es, depreciation allowances, and investment credits,
five percent of state income taxes and exemptions.
The 59 percent shar-
ing of pollution costs with government is available to profitable firms,
while marginal firms do not enjoy the benefit.
Further, the cost shar-
ing is available only to firms that control pollution.
The OAP regional model was estimated using 1967 data.
The
model parameters would reflect this level of cost sharing provided the
firms in all industries actively instituted control at that time.
Thus it
is possible to state that when control is instituted {say under strategy 1
below} as much as 59 percent cost sharing is available to industries.
However, in view of the caveats in the Wilson-Minnotte paper, this
level may overstate the level of government assistance.
When a simulation strategy calls for government financial as-
sistance, that would be viewed as additional cost sharing.
24
I
j _u ~..
-------
4.
Treatment of Benefits
In any region, air pollution damages will be considerably reduced
with a corresponding improvement of air quality.
These "benefits.!
from air pollution control are somewhat harder to quantify, compared
to the costs of control.
In general, the damages of air pollution are external to market
transaction and, thus, have no "prices.' that can be identified in the
market system of a given economy.
Therefore, most of the damage
estimates must be based on some statistical relations between the level
of pollution and changes in property values, health expenditures, and
the like.
Some types of benefits (such as the quality of life) are clear-
ly beyond the scope of proper measurement at this time.
With such difficulties, some reliable estimates of benefits are
very li:rnited.
In particular, the technical relations between the level
of air quality, and the corresponding changes of damages are almost
non-existent.
This is an area crying out for further empirical studie s.
A long-term health cost study is currently underway on Community Health
Environment Surveillance System (CHESS) which use s survey methods
to relate socio-econonric variables to the estimated health costs in
selected communities over the nation. * In some linrited AQCRs, changes
>:( Estimating Health Costs Attributed to Air Pollution, Depart-
ment of Health, Education and Welfare, Mimeo, 1971.
25
-------
.- .-...:.~_.-.-.__.-..--.._-~_....~._~~_..., -"L"" ~--,
--=. -. .-.
of property values related to air quality have been reported.
However,
such estimates are unavailable for most of the AQCRs.
Be sides health
expenditures and property values, other types of damages, such as
extra buildings and household maintenance costs, productivity 10s ses,
damages to plants and animals, inefficiency in the economy caused by
delays, accidents, etc., need to be estimated.
A Status Report by Barrett and Waddell~' covers the estimates of
damages on health, material, vegetation, soil, animals, aesthetics,
property values, etc.
A total of $16. 1 billion was reported for the
United States by a survey qf 36 studies related to the air pollution
damage s .
Two points need to be made about the Barrett-Waddell report.
First, the relations between "standards" and "damages" estimated still
remains unclear.
These estimates by each AQCR are non-existent.
Second, it must be stressed that some types of expenditures car-
ried out when air quality was lower will not take place after improve-
ment in air quality.
For example, reduced expenditures on laundry
result in an effective increase in income to the consumer, but reduce
income to the laundry industry.
In order to model these phenomena
detailed estimates of consumer behavior patterns would be required.
>:< Barrett, Larry B., and Thomas E. Waddell, The Cost of Air
Pollution Damages: A Status Report, Environmental Protection Agency,.
July, 1970. -
26
-------
.-.............,..""'-~',,,-
4 '_--;I...' -;"'":.)",,..-.''';;..'.. .
~~----=-
. ,'~ .
.. - ",--"'-"'.'_.. -
. - ....... '... ,. . . ~ . "''''.
At the present stage, it is possible to use only IInet" benefits,
which may be thought of as the increment in national final demand due
to air pollution control.
The different levels of Iinet" benefits assumed
here are different levels of increment in national final demand.
C.
The Alternative Strategies
Given the general discussion of the dimensions described for
each specific strategy in the previous section, a list of alternative
strategies can be designed as follows.
1.
Straight Implementation 1973-75,
Without Additional Government
Financial Assistance
This strategy require s implementation of the standards specified
by the Clean Air Amendments of 1970 by 1975.
It is assumed that the
actual period of implementation will be .1973-1975. This is because
states are expected to get their implementation approval and regulation
in force only by the end of fiscal year 1972.
No additional governmental
financial as sistance than what is implicit in the existing tax structure
is provided.
27
-------
~~-'q'" .....;~;-';;::';':'::...;'~~ -';'~"'''''R U'-. -~-,,:~..~_.',-~-';::-;~-.:'~~-"-..----~'--
. - -.-..-. '-, .,,- -.~ .
_. .. -- - .
.", -;-- .--.....;. --"J ..
- .t" :"';' ".--. . ,.. ,- :.. - ;~.. "
~. -' --:.-- ...""::'. #~"
-----~=~===-~~~
2.
Extended Implementation 1973-1977.
Without Government Financial Assistance
This strategy is the same as strategy 1 except that it allows all
AQCRs to extend the target year to 1977. as the maximum extension
permitted by the law. without any financial assistance from the govern-
ment.
3.
Straight Implementation 1973-1975. With
59% of Government Financial Assistance
This strategy has a fixed target of 1975.
However. 59 percent
additional of control costs will be borne by the government.
4.
Extended Implementation 1973-1977, with
59% of Government Financial Assistance
This is the same as strategy 2 except that the government will
share an additional 59 percent part of the control costs.
In the above four alternative strategies. a $10 billion net
bene.fit over the entire implementation period is assumed.
In order to
test a different level of benefits. two additional strategies were included
with a $15 net billion benefit.
5.
Straight Implementation 1973-1975.
Without Government Financial Assistance
and Benefit = $15 Billion
This strategy is equivalent to strategy 1, except that the level
of net benefits has been changed from $10 billion to 15 billion.
28
-------
T .
- '. ~--:::.....::.=..,,;:
6.
Extended Implementation 1973-1977, With
590/0 of Additional Government Financial
A ssistance and Benefit = $15 billion
This strategy is equivalent to Strategy 4, except that the level of
net benefits has been changed from $10 billion to 15 billion.
7.
"Mixed" Implementation Strategy
For a selective number of AQCRs, a two-year extension will be
permitted, although other AQCRs will be required to meet the standards
by 1975, and this strategy can be specified with or without government
financial as s i s tanc e .
This strategy will be s pecified':< after analysis of
the simulation results of previous strategies in order to identify a set
of selected AQCRs with different implementation requirements.
The above listed strategies can be identified through the use of
the following table.
.. . '" ~ . .
>:<. . See Chapter 4.
29
-------
~ ~ a).e 2.
A Summary Table of Seven Alternative Strategies
w
o
Level of Add. Govern. Financial
Alternati ve Target Year Level of Benefits Asst. (0/0 of Control Cost)
Strategies $15 billion
1975 1977 $10 billion Without 59% 75%
Strategy 1 x x x
Strategy 2 x x x
..
Strategy 3 x 'X X
I
Strategy 4 'X 'X x
Strategy 5 x x 'X
Strategy 6 x x x
Strategy 7~< (mixed) x (mixed)
I
~
-------
-,,,,~,,,,"---,,,-"""-~-"-,"".. ..'..:..-.:.~._~"'" ~":'J'IC...~,. '!,.'. Ii- .,."::......''''':':'':.f''...;.u)'';;''''''';"..:o....;,---.---., .;..~'.j ~ ..:....-i."":''''':'.. ~-
.. .~'C. ........U...A......',.....
CHAPTER 3: CONTROL COSTS AND ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS
This chapter is addressed to the assembly of data on control costs
corresponding to the Clean Air Amendments of 1970 and regional econo-
mies in 91 AQCRs in a manner that would permit the simulation over
time of the seven strategie s specified in the last chapter.
A.
Control Cost Estimates -
The preliminary cost estimates provided by EPA reflect that the
national ambient air quality standards are equivalent to the emission
reductions as shown in Table 3. 1.
This table shows percentage re-
duction of emissions by major source categories, while Table 3.2
gives emission reduction by major industries.
Five m.ajor pollutants;
particulates, oxides of sulfur, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and
oxides of nitrogen, are included
Control cost estimates, as shown in Table 3.3, summarize costs
of control for major sources.
The total investment costs are the neces-
sary investment requirement through the implementation years under the
assumption that the standards established under the Clean Air Amend-
ment of 1970 Act will be fully implemented.
Annual costs are the sum
31
-------
Table 3. 1:
National Emission Reductions by Major Source
which Reflect the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards of Clean Air Amendments of 1970
Categorie s
Elnis sion
Pollutant Sour ce Category Decrease (%)
Particulates solid waste 97.6
stationary combustion 94.6
industrial process 91. 1
Sulfur oxide s stationary combustion 88.4
- industrial process 90.7
Hydrocarbons solid waste 90.7
industrial process 97.4
Carbon . solid waste 95.0
monoxide industrial process 98.0
Nitrogen industrial process 89.1
oxide s
Source: Estimates of control costs provided by EPA.
32
-------
. .
,,:a.:::t:..;.a.:. .. ~ ~.-'t~~,...':':'~,i&:Il.z.o.,...... .:.',.~~.:,.;.::.),O :_,'...'1:O:'J~~:1':,,,..~.~ ...~,-.-.". ..;;sr;.;~..-.....~:'t;:",~ "".".I!lih,~...';'-- ~ ...:..~_.........i!;...:...,:..':;;J~"";'_...~.(.Io~~':'~...~.~- . -." ': '--.10.:.........:-,-'-"._""'''''' -' ~;~:-- .~-_.. _. -. .i
-------
Table.3~ 3: Kstimates of Control Co'sts Provided by EPA
S::ource :Categories' Total Invest- Annual Cost
ment Require - with 100% of
Indus trie s: SIC: ment ($ mil.) capita liza tion
($ mil. )
Gi-ain.MiUfng _and ,Handling,: 2042 414 87
Kraft P.iilP: 2611 38.3 14.7
Nitric Acid : 50 11
Sulfuric :Acid 2819 147 34.6
Phosphate 2811 31 15
Petroleurn:Refining. and.:.
Storage '. 2911 478 44
Asp:halt -Hatching' 2951 154 33
PO r tland ::C e me nt,. 3241 89 24
Lime 3274 28.7 7.2 .
Gray Iron',T:oundries : 3321 282 85
S.te e 1 3323 829 353 .
Erimary- Copper' 3331 266.4 77.4
Primary Lead 3332 65 15.6
Primary. Zinc 3333 40.7 .17.7
Primary-Aluminum 3334 223.3 75.8
S.econdary-Non:..£e.rrous .'
metals: 3341 31.6 9.3
S:tational'.corribusion~.
Electric :P.ower ~ 3960 960
O:ther~ 897 1145
Sblid Waste 309 196
34 -
-------
~---~.~....._-o----..-_..------~-~"..-;:.-~~~
of operating and maintenance costs, interest expenditures, and deprecia-
tion for the year, assuming 100% of capitalization of control equipment.
Given a specified time scheme of implementation, the total
investment requirement is likely to be distributed over time.
Given
a three-year implementation from 1973-75, it is likely that annual invest-
ment expenditures on control equipment will be a "step-up" function.
That is, to say, a greater proportion of the investment will take place
in year 1975.
For any given straight implementation strategy, it is
assumed that time scheme of investments will be distributed as follows.
Implementation Year
0/0 of Total Investment
1973
15
1974
35
1975
50
With installations of control facilities, the annual operational cost is as-
sumed to be parallel to the accumulation of the investment.
If for the
target year, 1975, annual operational cost is 100, then the index of annual
operating cost during the implementation period will be:
Implementation Year
Index of Annual Cost
1973
15
1974
50
1975
100
On the other hand, for the two-year extended implementation of five
years from 1973 to 1977, it is assumed that the weight of investment
will be shifted to the later years, as follows:
35
-------
Implementation Year
% of Total Investment
1973
5
1974
10
1975
35
1976
40
1977
10
and the corresponding annual operating cost index can be given as:
Implementation Year
Index of Annual Cost
1973
5
1974
15
1975
50
1976
90
1977
100
Given the above time scheme of the control cost distribution, the year-
by-year cost estimates for both straight implementation by 1975 and two-
year extended implementation by 1977 were obtained.
Furthermore, control cost by AQCR by industry was obtained by a
step- by- step estimation of production capacity of each industry in each
AQCR, electricity used by industry and consumption by AQCR. >;,
Tables 3.4 and 3.5 show the estimated cost for straight implemen-
tation (1973-75) and extended implementation (1973-77) by major cate-
gories.
B.
Benefit Es timates
As part of the strategy specification, benefits levels of $10 billion
and $15 billion were used to measure overall damages recovered from
a cleaner air after the implementation of a given strategy.
>:< Industry control costs by AQCR were estimated by use of 2 to
4 digit SIC categories. A detailed list of cost estimates are included
in the Program RMS with users manual (See Volume II: Revised User's
Manual).
36
-------
Table 3.4:
Control Cost Estimates of 91 AQCR's
Under Straight Implementation by 1975
($ millions)
, I
Industry Annual Other Stationary An nua 1
~os.t Combustion Cost
Investment Annual Ele ctric Investment Annual Solid
,Year Cost Cost Power Cost Cost Was te
1973 277. 1 81. 1 64.9 78.9 100.' 7 20. 1
1974 646.5 270.3 2 1 2., 1 184. de >335;~5 66.9
1975 923.6 540.6 .. 415.9 262,..8,' :_671.0 133.8
. "
(.;.)'
-oJ
"
o
-------
Table 3.5: Control Cost Estimates of 91 AQGR I S
Under Two- Year Extended Implemen-
tation by 1977 ($ millions ) .
Industry Annual Other Stationary An nua 1
C:os t Combustion Cost
Investment Annual Electric Investment Annual Solid
Year Cost Cost Power Cost Cost Was te
1973. 92.4 27.0 21.6 26.8 33.5 6.7
1974 184.7 81. 1 63.6 52.6 100.6 20. 1
1975 646.5 270.3 208.2 184. 0 335.5 66.9
1976 738. 9 486.5 366.5 210.3 603. 9 120.4
1977 184.7 540.6 397..6 52.6 671.0 133.8
IoN
00
-------
-= .". .."-,-;-",= .:."+~....=.:_~-=~~~:;-~"7.~~;-:-:O;~==-";;--;;':::--~._.......",,--_.....-. ",.......:...;~:"".....,_:",....~,.:"-.~~",,",-:'..;.~.....'-".;..o,:''':' ..':'..01.~~:"'.- - '-.,.
It is argued that time scheme of annual benefits is likely to be
linked to the schedule of control implementation and some time lags
do exist between the stage of control and receipt of benefit.
For the current simulation study, annual benefit has been intro-
duced parallel to the accumulation of control facilitie s with one -year
time lag as shown in Figure 3. 1.
For straight impleme~tation the following index was used to
distribute total benefit during the implementation period.
Implementation Year
Index of annual benefits
1973
o
1974
15
1975
50
For two-year extended implementation the index is:
Implementation Year
Index of annual benefits
1973
o
1974
5
1975
15
1976
50
1977
90
Both $10 billion and $15 billion of benefits were distributed
using the above index for corresponding strategies.
c.
Economic Projections
Given the nature of a cross-sectional estimation of the current
model, projections of economic data in the future years are as impor-
. tant as control inputs preparation.
The OAP Regional Economic Model was estimated from 1967
economic data.
For the present simulation study of the economic im-
pact of alternative strategies for year 1973 through 1977, the Economic
39
-------
Figure 3. 1: Cost and Benefit Distribution
Over Implementation Period
1973-1977
100
90 -
80 -
70
60 -
50 -
~
Q)
'"(j 40
p
H
30 -
20 -
10 -
.-<
. ."
,,/"
,./
/'
/'
0/
,
/
I
I
/
I
/
I
I'" Time scheme
of benefit
/
I
/
I
/
/
/
/
./'
/
Time scheme
of cos t
~/
--
-- .
---
1973
1974
~
1975
1976
40
1977
-------
Projections for Air Quality Control Regions was used to provide the
projection of economic data for each AQCR in the future years. >:<
This OBE projection was provided through the use of the trend
projection similar to the Kuznets study. >~>:<
For each AQCR, 1967 data were used as base year data, which is
consistent with data base of the OAP model.
Then the growth rate s by
industry by AQCR were provided for years 1970, 1975 and 1980.
E cono-
roic data between the above projection years were estimated with linear
interpolation methods as shown in Figure
3. 2. ~:~:::C>:~
>,'< U. S. Department of Commerce, Office of Business Economics,
Regional Economics Division, Economic Projections for Air Quality
Control Regions, a report to the National Air Pollution Administration,
June, 1970.
>:<>:< Simon Kuznets, "Concepts and Assumptions in Long-Term
Projections of National Products, " Studies in Income and Wealth,
Volume 16, 1954.
>:<>,'<>:< Let:
y = base year (1967) data
o
Yt = economic projection of year t.
al = growth rate at year 1970
a2 = growth rate at year 1975
a3 = growth rate at year 1980
t ~ 1971, . . . , 1980
Then the economic projection for year 1971 to 1975 will be:
Yt = Yo (l + a1) [a25- a1 (t - 70J
For year 1976 and 1977 will be,
t = 71, . . , 75
ft (a3 - a2) ~
Yt .= Yo (1 + a1) {1 + (a2 - a1))(1 + 5 (t-75~ t = 76,77
.41
-------
.~,' .~--:'..'. - . ,,_~,~,.;'~.t~.~., _....:.':..._.,..:.,-..,:.,~._...:ai~,,"~~~.:,~':'~.~~~~~~~;;'::~;.:':.:::~~~""".,;j;;:~
~".:;;.",:",,'~r-_.. r- .~...
Figure 3.2: Example of Economic Projection
with OBE Estimates
/'
/'"
. t Pro)' ection --'----- . ./
POln ~ /
. -<)
-- I
I
-
-
-T
--
,/
./
. Linear
Interpolation
../'
./
/
\
Base
year
data
1967
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
42
-------
~~.;;..~';;-"'~'"""'~:'"
'.~-\..;..w.6';"';"''';'-.~~ .~::"~'- . .-.1";:: :""-"':'''4-''''''':OO.:.....-......i'~;;''';:''"-~'-'''~;...;I;:.("i&Q.-;.....;;.'~(-.a.t.~\!&,r~''''''~'',!.t.:~.....:.;.~~" -...J~..,,'''':~'.l,;:~'..'''':: -.1....';: ~';';.-...;;1 _.-.~,.~~
-=-==-. .
'''.J:.~
However, the OBE economic projection only covered 53 AQCRs of the
91 AQCRs under study.
Therefore, for the remaining 38 AQCRs, the
United States growth rate by industry provided in the same OBE report
were applied to the 1967.data.
D.
Note on Simulation of Strategies >:~
Every economic model represents a simplification of economic
phenomena as dictated by the requirements of the users.
Whe n the
model is later used for policy simulation, it is important to explore
carefully the theoretical implications of a given policy to be simulated
with this model. >:'>:~
This section describes the manner of introduction of a control
strategy into the model and the theoretical rationale for doing so.
1.
Overall Impacts of Air Pollution Control
Essentially, implementation of air pollution control strategies
will result in a resource allocations between different economic sec-
tors and hence a geographic redistribution of the economic activities
acros s the nation.
>:~ This section is an elaboration of the discussion provided by
CONSAD's May 15, 1971, report.
>:o:~ An example of policy simulation with large scale econometric
model see Fromm, G. and P. Taubman, Policy Simulations with an
Econometric Model, the Brookings Institute, 1968.
43
-------
Part of labor and capital must be devoted to the improvement of
air quality without any output to show for it.
The additional expendi-
tures for control equipment and corresponding increased operational
costs to the high emission industries will, in general, result in in-
creases in the prices of such products.
In such cases, substitutional
effects may result in reduced consumption of the products of high emis-
sion industries and increased consumption of products of low emission
industrie s.
Meanwhile, the demand for control equipment will generate a
series of new demands in the national economy.
It may be also argued
that there will be a significant shift of the health and service expendi-
~tures related to air pollution damages to other consumption sectors
as suggested in many damage studies. >:'
This change in the demand for different goods and services will
alter the national production of each industry.
Since the geographic
concentration of industries influences the distribution of cities and the
industrial belt of the United States, structure changes of the national
economy will, ~f large, have a profound effect on the regional economies
acros s the nation. >:<>:'
>:, Barrett, Larry, B. and Thomas E. Waddell, Ope cit.
>:<>:' New York Times, December 14, 1971, page 35, "In Gary,
Clean Air Means No Job," points out that Gary faces a 41% unemploy-
ment rate owing to the cutback of ste'el production.
44
-------
.:,....~'.......'._.~ ,-- ...""";"'.,...........,......... ,.';. ::'::",",'",,,'~~'~;,,' ..-:;., "~~""":~L1'h" _.._,~~' ~",;,,'.""~' ~'-~"'-"",~,. "''''~'''-~''-~'-'''--~- ._'-'---'-"".~-.---.~-
2.
Interregional Effects.
The OAP Economic Model System consists of two major
components, one with a national input-output model tied with a
regional market share matrix, and one with a cros s -sectional
regional model of 91 AQCRs.
The link provided between the regional model and the national
1-0 model is best explained- in the following manner:
since the
regional model is a cross - sectional model with manufaduring
industries as export-oriented industries, demands for manufactur-
ing products remains to be determined at the national markets.
At
this stage, in the absence of a time series national model with manu-
facturi'ng industries specified in detail, the 1-0 model and the
regional share matrix serve to link the regions with the nation.
Some data on air pollution control impact are obtainable only
at the national level.
For example, rough estimates on Iinet" benefits
accruable from air pollution control are available only at the national
level.
These estimates can be treated at the national level by the
1-0 model and distributed through the regional share matrix to the
regions.
Assuming an equilibrium economy, air pollution control
costs will shift up supply curves of high emission industries (which
are manufacturing industries) and cut down the production levels of
45
-------
. .
~....... ---.~~4-....:'.__....-..':._~4 :
._~. .-",. '-"""--~'. -~:_~-"';';"";';'~,,,.--,=,,,~::,,~=-=,,,::'''''-
such industries in each AQCR. ':' Since manufacturing industries are
export-oriented, changes in regional manufacturing production will
generate a sequence of interregional effects and feedbacks from
other regions, including the 91 AQCRs under study and the rest of
1-- --- -
I
-- -
the United States.
The use of national 1-0 model and regional market
share matrix as proposed here provides a reasonable simulation of
- -~~~---- -~=-=~ ~~he s e--inh~ rr-eg ional effe c ts. ':0:' - .
- - ..----.-- ----- ---..---------
._--_.- -- ~----_...'_. ---
--."----- ..--.
- . - - -.
.- -----. -. -
':' Price changes of high emis s ion industries due to the
increase in production costs due to air pollution control were pro-
vided exogenously. See Comprehensive Study of Specified Air
Pollution Sources to Assess the Economic Effects of Air Quality
Standards, Research Triangle Institute, December, 1970.
--.."-- .-.. - --
- - .:'.:' Another way to estimate such effects will be an aggregation
of changes in production by AQCRs as the estimates of changes in
demand at national level and then feedback to each AQCR through
1-0 model and regional market share matrix. However, such an
operation faced some difficulty as exper ienced in the simulation
reported in May 15, 1971. First, aggregation of 91 AQCRs in-
cludes only 60 percent of national manufacturing products. Second,
industrial data disclosure problems in-a number of AQCRs will
pose a problem to such aggregation.
46
-------
Given exogeneous information of percentage price change due to the
air pollution control, it is impossible to estimate how demand will
respond to the price changes without a full disclosure of demand and
supply relations at the national market, as shown in the following
..+ -
- - - --
figure.
---.. . -- . ---
... - -. - 0- - --
Price
.----.--.
-. --..-. ---
-- ------------_._--._--_.- --.-----.----------..---.-----.-- --_._--- ----.-------.-.--- "__0.
.'..-.-..
~ ... ---
~. + "-+-- - -- .. .---.-_.
-.-----_._- -------
. -------- .------------- ----.--.---.. --_.-
__.0- -------- ---_._-_.+.-
fjp
D
Quantity
!J.Q
Let:
e =
!l9../&...
Q P
+-----. -
where:
e is price elasticity of demand
£ is percentage change of price
P
6.Q
Q
is percentage change of demand response to the price change
47
-------
Since it is not possible to estimate a set of price elasticities
on regional cross -sectional data, unit price elasticity was assumed
for the simulation study.
This is to say I percent of pr ice change
will result in I percent change of demand (an acceptable assump-
.. ..- --- -
tion for automobiles, but one that require s caution for other
industrie s).
---------------------3.--"Control Costs-and Manufacturfng-Sector in-the Region-al
--- --. - - .--. -------- --- - -- -----.. - Model - .. ...- - - -. .. ... .-..-.. ..
-- ------------.- ---
.- - -- -.+
Control costs, both investment expenditure on control equip-
ment, and annual operational cost, are usually considered as
non-productive expenditures in addition to conventional productive
cost expenditures.
In general, "gross profit!! is defined as the difference between
total sales (which is value of shipments) minus cost of intermediate
and raw mate-rials and wage bill.
IT = X -
~ M - WB
i i
-- - . ---
w he r e :
IT is gross profit
X is total product (value s of shipment)
M,'s are raw materials and intermediate goods (Input)
1
WB is wage bill
48
-------
Under air pollution control, additional operational costs to control
air pollution on production process will result in a further reduction
of the gross -profit.
n~:~ = X -:EM. - WB - C
. i 0
1
- ..- - --- -. - - - - -0 .._-
- ------ - == - n - C -
o
-.----,.,. --- --- _.
--.-----.-'----'---- --.-..- ~-- ......
-...- --- ..----
where:
._--- --_.
n* is Kross profit- with air pollution controL>:~_.
---.---- ----'------'--'----'-"----- ----
--~ - - - - -.--
_.- - ._- -
.__._- ..-.---.- -- _n__,-_- __d
.0-_- - -. ----,------_.
-_.__._-- .------ --
C is additional operational cost due to air
o pollution control
Co includes operational costs of control on industrial processes,
operation costs of industrial stationary combustion, and price in-
creases in the electricity due to a price increase in the electricity
(under an assumption that power industry is a monopoly in the
region).
Other costs such as charges in industrial solid waste may
also add to the cost increase in the production due to an air pollution
control.
- . -
In addition to operational costs which contribute to the changes
---_. -_.- -- --_.
. - . - - - ..
in the "flow" of gross profit, :.investment expenditures on air pol-
lution control will alter the investment on the productive capital
stock accordingly.
Moreover, changes in the gross-profit due to the
additional cost of production affects the investment behavior as well.
~'< All variables with an >:, in this section are estimates of endo-
genous variable s afte r control.
49
-------
I = f (ll)
1):< = f(ll):') - CI
where:
. ~_. .-- - -
-.--.
.- . -- -.
I is investment on the productive capital stock
. - - - - .- ~-.
. -.- - .- --. ---
1),'< is inve stment on the productive capital stock
with air pollution control
---_'_-0'-__,_. ----.-----.-.-----
--- . ...-- 0__.___.----. _-n-__._._._-~---- --.-.--.------- -------.------------- .__._--~------~ ~
I - ,
. . .. ..- _.-. -. - . --
q ---- h C. is inve stment cost of air .pollution control-equipment-
I
-'._--- ------..---------
Changes in the productive investment will lead to a change in
productive capital stock.
Kt = Kt- 1 + It - dKt
K),'< = K + 1* - dK):<
t t- 1 t t
where:
Kt is total productive capital stock
,0-
K'" is total productive capital stock after
t air pollution control
- .-. -.-. -------
---- ..... ---_._- ,-
50
-------
The Cobb-Douglas p'roduction function in the model as sume s
constant returns to scale. ~:< Outputs will change proportionally to
the production capital stock assuming that ratio between wage and
price of capital to be constant. ~:<~:<
.-- - .,.. - ....--- - +._-
_.__.- .
.. ----. ---...-- ...-- -- --.---.-...--.-.
- -- ---. -----.-.--..------.- ---------- ,.d..
- -+- -'.--- -..
---- - - -.- -
.- ~ -- -, - .
Labor
-------- -----~-- ----_...
-- _. -- -_.--_._---_.._u_---~ ---------- ---- --_._-----. - ---------+---- .
.. - + .._---
+_.-. ..-----
- - ---- --------
~._'-'-'-- - --~ -'~ --
---'-~'--'------- - ----- -----~-
Isoquant and
Expansion path of
the Cobb- Douglas
Production
Function
Productive Capital
K'..
..'
K
-_.. -. -- ."--- ."
~+- -- --.-''''-''''_-__.0_____.
.- -- --. -- +'-_.-.-.-
~'< Mathematically it is homogeneous function of degree one;
in other words I output will change proportionally to change in the
inputs.
~:o:< It seems to be reasonable to assume that wage and price of
capital are constants in a cros s - sectional model (at a given time
t).
51
-------
.;:';':;;':'~~:':~\'~'.~:"'.~"j~',"~. '",...~,~.....~.";."-~--;:... "..-.....;"..,.,.. <'.
"":111'~~'--''''''''-~~''''-'''_-.''''''''-'''''_'''''''''''''''''''<10.........._---j-.......""............ft,",~> ~-
- - - ------.- -------.
. .,~_..__._._----~_._" --- ---.". - .~"'-"'.-'~ --- -.c- -o-----.-o-,~ .'-'--,",'O"",",,"C-=-....-c.;---=-~~;:.~-----;-
y~:< = y .
( ~~:< )
w he re :
Y is the output measured by value added
----- -
--Y": is.t~2:_~utput after air pollution control
- . - ~ -
- -- - -- -..-
. '---- - - --.
Finally, changes in production level will lead to a change in
--:------------ .. .employment.
With a. Cobb,.. Douglas. production function, wage bill,
'-'~--' -------..-.- >--
- .- - .- ----..-
--~-> - .u_- --.-
..... .- .-- ---
- ----- .---. .--
.--- --- --"- -- -
.->-----
by definition, is a fixed share of value added, then:
WB = {3 Y
WB~:<
- Ry'"
- fJ 'I"
N~:< =
WB"~
W
where:
WB is wage bill of production worker
{3 is a labor share coefficient from a Cobb-Douglas
production function
N is number of production workers
- -,- - ----.--..--,---------.---- -..--
.---.-.- ..-.
W is wage rate
* implies the corresponding variables after
air pollution control
52
-------
Some overall assumptions need further remarks.
The capital
and labor inputs for air pollution control were separated from pro-
ductive capacity in the model so that the estimated structure of produc-
tion functions remained the same.
Furthermore, increases in
- ..-- ---
. -- --- -. -- .-.-
_._- - --
--------.- .-.
. .- - -._--. --
. -- - - ... . -~- --" ~ - -
operational costs due to air pollution were not merely additional
labor and capital but include additional cost increase from its pur-
----~=-~~~.-=--=.~=~~£hase.Jfor:~~~g~~)rice.i~cr_~a~es -~~ el~~_t_ri~i:y'~a~_d other fuels are- _n__..- -.--
-- -. - '-----,-- - - ------~-- -.-- - - ---'--
typical components of control costs).
4.
Regional Income Block
In the regional income dete-rmination block, a simple Keynesian
model gives:
Y = f(V~:~, C, G)
C = f (Y)
G = i(T)
whe re:
Y is regional personal income
-- --'-- - ------------
- --- - _n_.-. -
V~:~ is manufacturing production (value added) with air
pollution control
C is regional consumption
G is regional government expenditure
T is regional government revenue
53
-------
Besides, a decrease in manufacturing production of control
costs will have an impact on regional personal income.
A price
increase in electricity due to pollution control will cause a reduction
in real dis posable income.
,. - --- - - ~- _. -_...
-- ----- ---
- - Suppose:--
--.-.--.. ----
-- -----"- ----'----~ ----- -. --- - ----- --- --
---. ._- - - -.
u,-n- ._..
- tJ.y = tJ. q Oc
1---
----- ---- ---_._--- Vlfhe_re_:.._- -.- -- --.- --_u_----------.----------------.---- ---.----------- .---- ----..--.--------- ..----
. -- - -- ---
. "- --- ...-----
~ ----
------ .'4__- ---+ . _.. -..----.--.- .-_. ------------- ---- ---.------.-.----.---.------.
tJ.q is price change in residential use of electricity due to
air pollution control
Qc is total kilowatt-hours of residential use of electricity
~ Y is total reduction of real dis posable income
This change in real income also affects other variables in the
regional income determination.
Further, it is plausible that changes
in regional income may also affect regional government revenue, that:
T'.. - f (Y''')
-'I" - ',"
At the current stage of model development, T is__co_~sid~:r:-=:C! to-
.. - ..-. -
be exogenous in the model.
Therefore, changes of local government
revenue (T>:<) due to changes in regional personal income (Y>:<) are
merely a side calculation in the simulation study (when required as
54
-------
in Chapter 4).
It is suggested in Chapter 6 that local government
revenue should be endogenous.
5.
Labor Market Block
Regional employment in the sector other than manufacturing
-----._..___4-.- + + -
.. -- industries(N) is a simple function of difference between regional
personal income and a value added of manufacturing industries.
N~:< = f (y~:, - ~V~:,)
--------------------------------------- ----- -- 1-- -._--
-.--.'----------------"----'--------"'--'- .,....-------- --- '___0'_- ._-
_..... ---
-. -..- -. - h_.- .
-Arid total regional employment is
- -- "---- - ----------------_.---._-- -------_._---_._-_.._----
. - . _H -
N'::: =
-- ~
N~:' + i N~:'
In the original estimation of the model based on 1967 data
- labor force supply function and regional unemployment were given
as:
L = f (N U)
U=
L-N
L
x 100
where L is regional labor force
U is regional unemployment rate
-. --.-_._-._--
- --- - -. --
. - --- --
However. since OBE trend projections of regional economic
data are used for future years 1973 through 1977.
The 0 BE
55
-------
.:o:....~..~L.";;=,;._"r-':~i.-.~.~;..;.,~.t~;...-.J..'.' ''''''Ullr_~--'-''''.'~
assumptions of 4% fixed regional unemployment rate are used for
the future years.
Thus:
u = 4. 00
L>1' = f(N):', U)
--. --- - - - --~ ---- ------.
.~----_._-- -- .
-- -- --. -
~_4 4-- . - -.- -'-- -'----"----. --- --
6.
Electric Power Demand Block
In this simulation study it has been assumed that electric power
--:-n_--------industry is -able to pass on the entire cost increase due to pollution -- - -------------
- - -. . -- - .. . -
-. .-- ~_. -.----_.- --.-- -.
h.__._.-.- '--------_4 - --.-- .- ---_-._0...___- -----'--'--__4_4___..
control as price increase to the users.
In return, changes in production and consumption due to
pollution control strategy in the region will alter the demand for the
electricity.
Qi>:' = f (V {')
Qc>:' = f (C>:')
Q>:< = f (Y>:< - V>:<)
Q>" ~ Q ,'. + Q ,'. + Q--"<
" =i (' c'" "
w he r e :
---- - -- . ._-
- ~-------------
- -- ~ -~ .-.-- -+- __h.
Qi:< is electricity demand of manufacturing industry, i with
pollution control
Q~:< is residential demand of electricity with pollution control
Q>:< is electricity demand of industries other than manufacturing
industries with pollution control
Q>:< is total regional demand of electricity
56
-------
:.:.';:".:,~'-';., -""'Y'r~-':""" ._"'-T''''''''f''''''''''''''l''''''''~~_....;o;o.,~
CHAPTER 4: -ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF
SELECTED STRA TEGIES
A s air pollution control requirements are instituted in the nation,
the consequent effects are incident differentially in the various AQCRs.
-- -- .-.. -.
The primary purpose of regional economic. modelling is to provide
quantitative estimates of such differences among the AQCRs in any
----:---------particular treatment (strategy) and _among different tr~at~~nts.
.- ---------- - .'.'.
- ,-. -- ----- --. -. 0__-
. - - --- - - -- --_u- -
- --- -- -- ------ . - -- .
- . -- ----
. -- -- ~ --- . .
The second purpose of the model is to provide information on such
differences among regions and among strategies ,that is useful to de-
termine implementation strategie s.
For example, it is possible to
argue that the "perfect!' strategy is one in which each AQCR suffers
the same degree of economic hardship.
Exact measurement of such
a condition is impossible, since there is no single measure of economic
hardship.
However, the use of this regional model permits useful es-
timation of the degree of differences in the treatment of AQCRs neces-
sary to achieve some degree of uniformity in_the effects of implemen-
.. .-- -.-- _.. ----- - .-..- - -.-
tation of pollution control requirements.
Even, if spatial equity were
not pursued as a major goal the EPA administrator has the option of
extending implementation period by two years under certain circum-
stances.
Other forms of targeted assistance (differential cost sharing,
etc.) are also possible.
Consequently, the regional model can be used
57
-------
,:",C','-I'I-'- '.1';;;:,- .. .....~..\...,''''''- ----...._-:-_....~._---_......_-_.._--_.-.._.__.
to design and assess such "mixed" implementation strategies (in
which different AQCRs are treated differently) by trial and error,
50 that some guidance may be available to EPA officials to achieve some
degree of equity among AQCR s in control implementation.
. _.- -~---_.
-.--.-.-". ---- -.-
- This chapter is addressed to a description of the effort directed
to both of the above purposes of the OAP Regional Economic Model.
.--
--:------------ F:irst it opens_with ~ 1?_r~e~d~_scripti_o.Il 9f_t~e- ~:~~e~?r_~ o~ ~nal!~~ ~ of
-- -- -- --_._-- ---
I
- .- - - . ~ .p-.-
... ---.
-- _.. - - - -----.
.- -- -. .-- ___'n' - --.- -. --
economic impacts and the rationale for the measures' of impact of con- .
. - . '- - -.- -. --.-..
. ---~ -- -.- -..
trol used in this chapter.
It proceeds to a comparative description of
the economic effects over time aggregated over 91 AQCRs under the
.. alternative strategies.
Next it provide s a comparison of strategie s in
terms of the geographic pattern of incidence of economic effects,
specifically, the geographic distribution of economic hardships.
Next~
it relates the geographic patterns of economic effects to the scale and
industrial composition, the locational factors and the economic history
of the regions.
Finally, in the light of these analyses, mixed strategies
'- ._------~ -- ---,,-+-
--. - H_. .--
of implementation that provide some equity among regions in terms of
economic hardship are designed and assessed.
58
-------
1"'- .,' '~~.."-
'.'.-"--:;:;~'. -.'.
._-- -- -- .-
-_.._-----~-'- _.
tt'" - - '":",,,"'''''''\0,: -:~. ;11',";~' ;..'";,; . .
. '''~'->~.;'';'::',..~.*.:.,.;;;-=~~~:~~-'!':'~:'t.. - . ~...._~
... ..¥'":::..,~.'";:'~"'~'-:~~'~~=" ;;':'-':"~'
~:":"::.-:-;;.;:: -. :.' '4~..,:'.-~~.::t=..,._.- :~' "....""'" -~ =- ::: ~:..;.:~~:.:.;~:.::.;.=='..:.
A.
Measures of Economic Effects
of Implementation Strategies
All the strategies simulated assume the preliminary EPA esti-
mates and have, therefore, the same aggregate costs for 91 AQCRs
. - ove'r the implementation pe riods ~
However~ they differ from one
another in the length of the implementation period, level of government
..cost sharing with industry, and the level of benefits. . Thus, the geo- ..
--.. - -.--- - - -
. ... --. . .--
.. -_._-
---. ----.- --------------<..--
. -- - --. -- .-
-- - -----_.------ - -
graphic and time incidence of control costs vary among AQCRs (apart
from their differences in terms of industrial composition).
The s e
varying levels of control costs lead, in turn, through the operation
of the complex interrelationships of regional economies (as captured
by the OAP model) to a range of effects on high emission industries,
consumers, employment, tax payers, local government, and regional
growth.
The simulation of the strategies through the OAP model provides
a large number of measures of these economi.c effects .(Fig~re ~.)).
Figure 4. 1 gives a sample output for Pittsburgh AQCR in the year 1975
under strategy 1.
There is a list of variables and four columns of out-
. puts.
The first column- - "without control"- - shows OBE economic pro-
jections without any air pollution control.
The second column- - "with (T -1)"
- -provide s the projection of the variable in column 1 with air pollution
control to year T-1 (which is 1974) but before control is applied in 1975.
59
-------
Figure' '. 1
: I
. 1
T H R E EYE A R 5 T R A I G H T I ~1 P L E MEN TAT ION 1 9 7 3 : - 1 9 7 5
. WITHOUT GOVERNMENT FINANCIAl ASSISTANCE
BENEFIT = $10.0 HILLION I
. ,
: ;
. I
I
i
,
i I
, ,
, I
I :
TOTAL NET EFFECT OF ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES PURSUED IN THIS RUN
AQCR
PITTSHURGH, PA.
8
MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES
VALUE ADDED (MILLIONS)
PRDFlT (MILLIONS)
INVESTM(NT (MILLiONS)
CAPITAL STOCK (MILLIONS).
EMPLOYMENT (1000 S)
OTHER INDUSTRIES
.EMPLOYMENT (1000 S)
TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME FOR THE REGION (MILLIONS)
REGIONAL .CONSUMPTION (MILLIONS):
TOTAL REGIONAL [MPLOYMENT (1000 S)
REGIONAL UN[MPLOYMENT (pERCENT)
TOTAL LABOR FORCE (1000 S)
GOVERNMENT REVENUE FROM THE REGION (MILLIONS)
ELECTRIC POWER DEMAND
I
TOTAL ELECTRIC CONSUMPTION FOR THE REGION (10 M KWS)
ELECTRICITY USEU HY MANUFACTURING INOUSTRIES (10M KwH)
ELECTRICITy USEO BY OTHER' INDUSTRIES (10 M KWH)
RESIDENTIAL CONSUMPTION IN THE REGION (10 M KWH)
, .
,:
i :
WITHOJTj.
CONTROL,
; :
, I
, I
'i676.738
1782.22S
'"i3U.380
3679.000
309.880
! j
,
, I
I
I
, I
, ,
7'i9~8'i
I :
,
I :
1060'i.8b7
632:h~73
lUSY.72'i
'i.OOO
110j.879
733.77.8
. I
I
! I
, i I
i .
. l'i76.17.3
710.333
36U.96'i
'iOS.'i76
! I
.
.' '
I :
fOR 1975
WITH
(T-l)
'iSbl).b1.7
l'iL~.3Lj3
3'19.670
J:,'/s.i7L
Juj.lb7 .
. 7'1(;.23
luLj9i.'i88
62';(,01'15
iUS 1 . 'i I :c:
'10016
1Iu.c.i::'/1j
'I:c'L.'1t;b
I'1S~.7&~
,,91.lLJU
jS'7.717
~IJj.b2t3
NET
CHANGE
._-,
-1'i'i.2S6
-117.lJS6
-'ib.:C9!::
-C,:t..E9CY
-lu..35S
-1..523
-16tfd.f31
-llrb.b63
-11.75<'-
l.ubeS
-12.Ll2
-1.5633.
-1.]li29
,-1013711
23.S79U
-lo121S
-2.2bCJf1
-2.LloO'i ,
-Lio :3002 1
-0.3,6'1
-1.2782
-------
It shows the cumulative effects of control through 1974 before control
of 1975.
The third column shows "net change II of control in year 1975
and the last column shows percentage change of control in year 1975.
An assessment of these effects is best organized by identifying from
--------. "-- - -- --- -
among this long list a few indicators of strategic importance to the pur-
pose at hand.
The purpose at hand is:
----- -----------______L_'TO compare alternative strategies in_te~_m~_oL ---------------
. ---- - --- --------- - ------______effects aggregated over 91 AQCRs, -- ---
._._-----..~--_._- ---._---- -.._._._..--
"
"
..J
To compare the alternative strategies in terms
of the degree of adverse effects in different
AQCRs,
To explore the geographic patterns of impacts
in terms of industries, regions, government
and communities, and
To describe the geographic patterns of these
effects in terms of the locational factors, in-
dustrial structure and economic histories of
these AQCRs. The objective of this specula:"
Hon is to identify to some degree the transi-
tional adjustment problems in severely
affected AQCRs.
. To design and assess mixed strategies thaC. ---.
provide some degree of equity among regions.
- --- - ---
- - - -- -- n
The measures that appear to be relevant from these criteria for each
of the three major sectors in the regional economy are shown on the
following page.
61
-------
Sector'
Measure
Manufacturing industries
1.
Manufactur ing production
(Value-added)
Manufacturing investments
(for production)
Regional personal income
Unemployment rate
Government revenue
.- . -- - -- -- -
2.
-..- ---- ~
- -- -.---- - -----.--
------_. ---
---.---.--
3.
--, .A.
5.
Regional economy
Government
The rest of this chapter interprets the results of the simulation of the
'-:-.--- --.'-.var'ious-strategies in- terms of these-five measureS.
. ---------- ----- --~--_._-- --.--
- ._-----~---_..._..- -~._-+_.. - ..- -...-
- - -- -- .
..- --_.-
---_. -. ---_._-_._-~. - .-..
- - --- -- - - - ------ .-----. .
- - -- -_.._- ---.-- - -
B.
Total Net Effects of Alternative Strategies
The 91 AQCRs included in the current study are the major metro-
politan areas of the United States.
They account for 64 percent of the
regional personal income, 56 percent of total labor force, and 60 per-
cent of the total manufacturing industries in the United States::< In gen-
eral, these AQCRs have a lower than national average of agriculture
and mining production but a higher than average of manufacturing, trans-
portation, wholesale-retail trade, finance and service sectors. "
-- - - - '-----." --
This section presents the effects of the four major strategies
aggregated over all these 91 AQCRs. A caveat is in order before these
* Per sonal income projections of the United State s and regional
aggregation for the year 1967 and manufacturing production percentages
in 91 AQCRs is estimated from Census of Manufactures, 1967.
62
-------
._---~
"-"---,--"-,""""""---.......~-.' ---'--~..- -~"'--''--::''-~-';--~~~~~''::'"'''-'''-''-'-'-'-'''''''-~-----''---'-.~'--'-.-'- -'~ --'~--_.'--"_.'.. ._~
effects are described and interpreted.
The OAP model is a cross-
sectional regional model; its strength lies in description of geographi-
cal patterns; however, aggregate changes are less reliable.
r.ables 4. 1 to 4.6 provide the economic effects aggregated over
._"._...- ._-- - -- .- ._--
.-'9f AQCRs under- six strategies described in Chapter 2.
-_. - -_.-
Several points are fairly evident when these tables are examined.
-------.-----.------.-. ___.!-__Th~ .economic effects under the different strategies
u.... - -- - --- -.--. - -.- -------u--______are sufficiently different to suggest that the regional-
economies are sensitive to the differences in the
strategies. The different economic indicators move
in the same consistent direction among the strategie s.
--- --~ .-
..-..- ..-
Expectedly, the economic indicators of manufactur-
ing sector (high emis sion) show the greate st range of
difference ,on a percentage scale among the strate-
gies. The regional economy and government indica-
tors show a narrower range of variations.
Extension of the implementation period from three'
to five years in each case reduces the aggregate ad-
verse economic effects. This is to be expected in
view of the spread of control costs over a longer
period. Further, the regional economies of 1977 are
larger than those of 1975 and the control costs form
a smaller percentage of the aggregate regional econo-
-.. - ----------_.
roies. - -
Strategies involving levels of cost sharing with high
emis sion industry that are higher than available
under existing legislation (1. e., over 59%) provide
additional re lief.
Economic adversity as measured by unemployment
rates is lessened in strategies assuming higher
levels of benefit.
63
-------
, I
I
, ,I
Ta )le "-". ~
, .'
Aggregate Economic Effects on 91 AQCR t s Measured by Five Ke'y :Variables lnder Stra :egy:l
. I .
I ; I
: !
; I
I ,
Three- Year Straight Implementation, 1973 - 75, Without
Gove rnment Financial Assistance, Benefit = $15. 0 Billion
'"
~
1973 1974 1975
Manufacturing Production Without control 189257.8 196005.0 202753.9
(value added, in $ million) ' 188863.8 1 946 U? . 5
With control 199730.1
Percentage change >:, -0.21 ' - O. 51 -0.78
I ,
, , '
Manufac turing Inve s tment (in $ million) Without control : . i 14031. 2 ! 14535.6 15041.4
With control ! ;13637.2 13150.0 12099.4
I
Percentage change :-2.81 -6.92 -11. 08
:
:
. .
(in $ 564383.5 I 591054.6 618190.5
Regional ,Personal Income Without control :
'
millions) With control I 563891. 9 ; 589317.8 6 144 13. 1
Percentage change : - O. 09 - O. 21 -0.32
I
Unemployment Rate Without control 4.0 ; 4.0 4.0
With control ' 4.084 4.281 4.509
, Net change :+0.08 ' +0.28 +0.51
I
, I ,
I :80273.6
Government Revenue (in $ millions) Without control : 50718.9 53038.7'
, With control ; 48389.0 , 50544.5 52659.3
I
: -0.10 -0.24 -0.37
, Percentage change
,~ In Tables 4. 1 to 4.6, this entry is the annual percent change. The cumulative
percent change for a year can be obtained by adding the given figures up to that
year. For example, the cumulative change in manufacturing production
for 1975 is (0.21 + 0.51 + 0.78) = -1. 50. .
, !
; ;
-------
- ,- -
i I
i
,
r~able /.,.2 : i
Aggregate Economic Effects on 9 . AQC ~ I S Measurec )y Five {e'y Varia )les lncer Strategy:2
Five- Year Extended Implementation Without Government Assistance
1973-1977, Benefit = $10.0 Billion . i
. I
, I
I
'"
U1
1973 I 1974 1975 1976 1977
Manufacturing Production. ,
(value added in $ millions) I :
Without control 189257.8 196004.8 I 202751. 8 211124.1 21"9497.5
With control 189128.8 195584.6 ! 201332.6 208372.4 2.15948. 3
Percentage change 0.07 O. 15 ' 0.49 0.61 0.32
I ,
I I I
Manufacturing Investment' i
(in $ millions) I I
I i
Without control 14031. 2 14535.3 I 1.5 039. 6 15667.4 16296.5
With control 13900.0 I 14119.3 : 13638.4 12985.6 12934. 1
Percentage change 0.94 1. 94 I :6.65 8.60 4.24
i
I I
Regional Personal Income I
(in $ millions) I
!
WithQut control 564383.5 591054.6 1618187.2 650558.6 683462.2
With control 564218. 1 590524.0 ; 616409.8 647 101. 6 678854.0
Percentage change 0.03 I 0.06 I .0.20 0.24 O. 14
I
i I !
Unemployment Rate I I
i i
Without control I 4.0 i 4.0 ' ~4.0 4.0 4.0
i
With control 4.027 4.088 i 4.250 4.427 4.395
Net change i 0.027 0.088 : 0.250 0.427 0.395
)
I
I
Government Revenue (in $ I
I
millions) ' I
Without control I 48438.4 50718.9 : 53038.4 55804.3 58615. 1
With control I 48421. 8 50665.6 52 85 9. 9- 55457. 1 58152.3
0.03. 0.07 ' .0.23 0.29 O. 17
Percentage change i '. i
I '
I I
I I
-------
; ;
~ ~able 4.3
Aggregate Economic Effec:s on 9 ' AQCR' s Measured by Five
i :
I :
-------
, ,
. ~able 4.'" ! '
; .
Aggregate Economic Effects on 91 AQCR I S Measured by Five Key Varia::> ,es Under Strategy A
, .
Five- Year Extended Implementation With Government Assistance:
1973-1977, Benefit == $10.,0 Billion .; I
, .
i ;
I ,
'"
-.J
1973 1974 ; 1975 1976 1977
Manufacturing Production. ' ;
(value added in $ millions) i :
Without control 189257.8 196004.6 202751. 6 21112~. 3 219495.2
With control 189206.5 195833.4 202169.9 209984.9 218024.1
Percentage change -0.027 -0.060 : -0.200 -0.2.53 -0. 132
I
i
Manufacturing Investment' I I i I
(in' $ millions) , ; I
Without control 14031. 2 14535.2 15039.3 15666)3 16293.8
With control 13977.6 14364.5 i4464. 1 1456315 14908.2
Percentage change -0.383 -0. 795 i -2.682 -3.343 -1. 576
I
! I
Regional Personal Income ! I
I
i
(in $ millions) i I
I '
WithQut control 564383.5 591054.0 618187.2 650557.1 683456.4
With control 564374.3 590819.6 617435.5 649122.4 681517.7
Percentage change ~0.011 -0.028 ! -0. 082 -0.099 -0.055
I
Unemployment Rate I '
, ' f
i
Without control 4.000 4.000 4.000 4. 000, 4.000
With control 4.009 4.037 4. 107 . 0 4.179, 4. 163
I
Net change +0.009 +0.037 +0. 107 ' +0. 179 +0. 163
i I
,
Government Revenue (in $ ' I
,
millions) i I I
I
Without control 48438.4 50718.9 53038.4 55804~2 58614.6
With control 48432.0 I 50695.3 52963.0 55660. 1 58425.3
Percentage change -0.013 -0.033 -0.096 -0. 116 -0.065
I I
! ;
I I
I .
-------
Three- Year Straight Implementation, 1973-75, Without
Gove rnment Financial Assistance, Benefit = $15. 0 Billion
; i
I' I
! II i
~ . I
by Five Key,Variables: ~nder S :ra :egy 5
: i '
I I
. I
I
T a :> Ie ',. 5
Aggregate Economic Effects on 91 AQCR IS' Measure<
'"
00
: 1973 1974 1975
Manufacturing Production Without control 189257.8 196005.0 202753.8
(value added, in $ million) With control 188863.8 194751. 5 200360.9
Percentage change -.21 -.43 -.54
:
Manufacturing Inve s tment (in $ million) Without control 14031. 2 14535.6 ' 1 5 04 1. 4
With control 13637.2 13159.8 12142.4
Percentage change -2.81 -6.85 -10.83
I ,
Regional Personal Income (in $ Vlithout control 564383.5 591054.6 618190.3
millions) With control 563892.0 58947 1. 7 6 15 048. 5
Percentage change -.09 -. 18 .24
:
; ,
Unemployment Rate Without control ; 4.00 4.00 4.00
With control 4.08 4.18 4.28
Net change ' '.08 . 18 .28
,
!
, ;
,
Government Revenue (in $ millions) Without control : "48438.4 .50718.9 53038.7'
With control I 48389.0 50559.9 52723.1
:
Percentage change - ~ 10 -.21 -.28
. ;
, :
I
!
'I I
I
, I
; !
i j
: I
I
I :
: I
I I
! !
: I
; I
, I
I I
I '
. !
I i
I ,
-------
,- -.- ~.
I
I
: I
~ ~ a ) Ie 4. 6 : . i
, I
Aggrega:e Economic E :fec:s on 91 AQCR I S Measured by Five Key :Variab .es ,Jnder S :ra :egy: 6
:..'
I
Five- Year Extended Implementation With Government Assistanc:e j
1973-1977, Benefit = $15..0 Billion '
i I
~ I
0'
-.D
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977
Manufacturing Production. '
; ;
(value added in $ millions)
Without c0ntrc'! 189257.8 196004.6 202751. 9 211123.2 2 1 9495. 4
With' control 189206.5 195844.7 202211.2 210148.2 2.18399.2
Percentage change -0.27 - O. 05 - O. 19 - 0.20 -0.04
:
I :
Manufacturing Inve stment . i !
(in $ millions) I '
Without control 14031. 2 14535.2 ~15039.3 15666.3 16293.9
With control 13977.6 14365.2 ; 14466.6 14573.7 14931. 7
Percentage change -0.38 -0.79 -2.67 -:-3.29' -1.49
I :
Regional Personal Income ! ,
I I
(in $ millions) I
I I
WithQut control 564383.5 591054.0 618187.3 650556.7 683455.8
With control 564319.3 590836.0 617492.7 649299.3 681943.8
Percentage change - 0..01 -0.03 - o. 08 -0.08 -0.03
I ' ;
Unemployment Rate ' '
, ;
Without control i 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
With control I 4.01 4.03 4.08 4.09 4.05
,
Net change i' . 01 . 03 '.08 .09 .05
i
I I
Government Revenue (in $ I ;
millions) ! - !
,
i
Without control I 48438.4 50718.9 :53038.4 55804. 1 58614.6
i
With control ! 48432.0 I 50697.0 !52968.6 55677.9 58462.7
Percentage change -0.01 - O. 03 -0.09 -0.09 - O. 03
; ,
, ,
, '
-------
More specifically, Table 4. 1 shows that with straight implementa-
tion by 1975 and without government financial assistance under strategy 1,
manufacturing production _(measured by yalu~:-_adde_dLiIl.tl:1e.s~ .AQCRs w~ll
. - H- - - .
decrease 1. 50 percent by 1975.
Further, investment in manufacturing
industrie-s (for production capacity) will drop from $15 billion to 12-,1
._------- -
billion which is about a 21 percent drop.
Personal income:and local
u_---.. ---- ---.- - g
-------
.mic indicators for the year 1975 in the former group with those of
the year 1976 in the latter group.
From such a comparison of
strategies 1 and 2, it is clear that extension of the'time of imple-
mentation is likely to help.
Table 4.3 shows that at a level of 59 percent of government
cost- sharing with the industrie s, at the end of year 1975, manufac-
----...--- -----_.--._.t~lrJng pro~uction will dr()p only.o. 62 percent, wh~chis about $1. 5
- -.-. --,- -.-" _._--,
--- ,.' - - -- -- .
. - .._-- ..
----..-- - --- . ._-
billion of production measured by value-added.
At the same time,
inve stment expenditure s for manufacturing production capacity
decreased by 8.3 percent compared with 21 percent without finan-
cial as sistance.
All the other three variables show a consistent
pattern of diminution of the adverse impacts.
Table 4.4 showing the effects of an extended time period
59 per'cent cost-sharing and a benefit level of $1.0 billion indi-
cates very modest drops in economic activity.
. n. - -'- ....
>:< See Federal Register, August 14, 1971, and Wilson
and Minnotte, op. cit.
71
-------
~-;.
The pattern of over-time distribution of both costs and benefits
in the strategies by itse 1£ may lead to difference s in the economic im-
pacts from year to year.
A s indicated in the previous section, without
a two-year extension, 50 percent of the investment costs and 100 per-
.. -cent of the operational cost will be incurred in the year 1975; therefore,
the impact will be much heavier in the year 1975.
o
For example, in
'-
~ -- ~- - .._-~._--- .- -
._____r~1:>l~ .4.. !,_ma~u.fac~~ring production~i~l dr.op.only 0'p2! perce!lt in. ..
.---.-..-.---
----- ..,.' ----
... -. ---. -..
"- n_._---. ~-.
- - .---....-.-- -_.
1973, O. 51 percent in 1974 and finally decrease by O. 78 percent in
1975.
The same pattern is true of the variables in Table 4. 2.
In
strategies 3 and 4 shown in Tables 4.2 and 4.4, the year 1976 incurs
40 percent of investment costs and 90 percent of operational costs of
a given control strategy.
For example, year by year changes of
manufacturing investment as shown in Table 4.4 are 0.38 percent in
1973, 0.80 percent in 1974, 2.68 percent in 1975, 3.34 percent in
1976 and 1. 58 percent in 1977.
Table s 4. 5 and 4.6 display the aggregate effects as sodated with
.. -- -- .--
the two simulations assuming a $15 billion level of benefits.
Unem-
ployment rates in strategy 5 are lower than in strategy 1 which assumes
. a $10 billion level of benefits.
The same observation is valid in com-
paring strategies 4 and 6 which differ in the level of benefits.
Unem-
ployment rates are lower in strategy 6 which uses a higher level of
benefit.
72
-------
-~~..::...-;:
C.
Comparative Analysis of the Alternative Strategies
-- ---"'" - -.. --. ..-. -
- - - - The previous section dealt with only the over -time aggregate
effects of 91 AQCRs during the implementation periods of each given
,
.. ---- - ---~
- - -- - -.-- -.-
- -. - -.
-- . .-
strategy.
However, behind these aggregate patterns lie a wide vari-
ation in economic effects among the different AQCRs.
Within anyone
.._. ------'--control strategy there is a conside rable' regional difference of economic
.. . -.- - -- - -
- -.-- - - -- -
.. --- --- -..-.-. - _.-
.-.- ---- . .-...-_.-._., -.---- ------
----- -
-~_._._. -~..- -- ~~.
impact.
For example, under Strategy 1 (three-year straight imple-
mentation from 1973-1975 without government financial assistance),
the annual level of manufacturing production (value -added) in 1975 will
drop 1. 78 percent.
However, as shown in Table 4. 7 for the same strategy
In 1975, there will be 29 out of 91 AQCRs which have 0.50 percent or
more reduction in the manufacturing production.
More precisely, 25
AQCRs will be in the range of 0.5 to 1. 0 percent and four AQCRs will
be in the category of 1 to 1. 5 percent.
Table 4. 7 presents the frequency distribution of the five economic
indicators for the AQCRs under strategies 1 through 4.
For each econ-
omic variable, a. number of classes as recognized and the number of
AQCRs in each class in each strategy identified;
73
-------
---! i
I
I ~
Ta).e 4. 7 ! i
Free uency Dis :ri mtion 0: Major Variables for AQCRs (S :ra :egies . throug 1 4)
~
~
Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Strategy 4
Three Year Three Year
Straight With- Extended Without Straight With Extended
out Assistance Assistance Assistance With Assistance
1973 1974 1975 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1973 1974 1975 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977
,
A. Unemployment Rate I : ,
Annual Change ' j
2 I
Deer. (be tte r off ) 2 3 7 4 4 4 5 :2 5 13 8~! 4 5 10
I
. 01% to . 49% 87 75 56 84 87 78 67 79 88! 88 80 77 . 86 84 80
.50% to . 99% 4 11 25 6 16 6 1 1 .0 6 1 . I. 1 2 1
I
1.00% to 1.49% 3 4 3 3' 1 I !O ' I
1. 50% and over ~ l ! : 1 ; I
I
To ta 1 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 ! 91 91 91 91 i 91 91 91
I i
B. Manufacturing Produc- i I
: I
tion (value added) : I
Annual change : :
I I
I
of Manufacturing I
i
Production ,
Increase 1 9 i 2 i 1 2 2 9
I
-. 01% to -. 99% 87 76 52 90 88 73 64 73 91 86 82 90 89 88 84 78
-1. 00% to -1. 99% 4 10 27 .,. 1 3 14 21 5 :3 4 I 2 3 2
I
-2.00% to -2.99% 2 5 1 3 1 12 1 , 1 2 2
-3.00% to -3.99% 1 2 1 0 1 ! 2 '
I
-4.00% and over 2 4 2 3 2 : ,
,
T ota 1 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 I 91 91 91 91; 91 91 91
.,
I
I '
,
I '
. I
i ;
I
I
i '
, :
i :
i I
I I
i ,
--- I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
I
-------
. I
. ,
: I
, ,
I
-.J
V'1
I ' I Strategy 4
Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strate gy 3
Three Year Three Year j
Straight With- Extended Without Straight With Extended '
out Assistance As sis tance Assistance With Assistance
1973 1974 1975 1973 1974 1975 1976 1 g77 1973 1q74 1q75 1973 1q74 1q75 1 q76 1 g77
,
:
i'
c. Manufacturing Invest- ; ;
ment (for production) I '
:
! I
Annl1al Pp"'Cf>nt C:h:lne:p ! ' ,
-4.9% or less 79 37 17 88 84 33 23 50 90 '78 58 91 90 ! 74 64 83
-5.0% to - 9.90/0 9 32 31 3 6 30 30 25 1 : 10 2.4 : 1 , 14 21 6
, ,
-10. 0% to -14. 9% 2 13 15 1 19 16 8 2 6 I 2 3 1
t I
- 15. 0% to - 1 9. 9% 1 5 13 4 9 3 ' 1 1 I 1 2 1
,.
i i
-20.0% and over 4 15 5 13 5 : 2 ' 1:
To ta 1 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 '91 91 91 91 91 91 91
i i
I ,
D. Regional Personal ! i
I I :
Income I
! : , ;
Anml::!l Pp,..C'pnt C:hane:p !
Increase. 3 1 3 1 2 7 1 I 2 3 10 9 : 1 5 11
o to -0.49% 86 73 57 90 89 78 68 76 87 18/ 81 80 82 . 87 83 '78'
I 0
-.50% to 0.99% 0 13 23 1 10 15 4 3 I 1 5 1 : 1 2 1
,
- 1. 00% to - 1. 49% 1 1 3 1 1 5 2 i 1 0 2 0 0
I
- 1. 50% to -1. 99% 0 2 : 0
1 1 1 1 1
-2.00% and over I
0 3 3 2 1 1 I 1 1
Total 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 .91 91 91 91 91 91 91
,
; !
; !
i
I ;
I ,
. ,
-------
~- - --------
!
I.
!
.
!
. ~
I
Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Strategy 4
Three Year Three Year
traight With- Straight With xtended
out Assistance Assistance ith Assistance
73--.l.274 1 75 1973 1
;
E. Government Revenue
Annual Change I
I
Increase 3 1 2 1 2 7 1 i ;2 3 10 91 1 5; 11
o to - 0.49% 84 67 51 89 89 68 ,59 70 87) '83 74 80 82) 85 78 76
-0.50% to -0.99% 2 15 24 1 2 16 19 7 2 i 3 5 i 3 7, 3
i
-1. 00% to -1. 49% 2 5 6 4 4 3 I! 3 2 1 2
I i . !
-1. 50% to - 1. 99% 1 2 1 5 3 I 1 1 1
I
- 2. 00% and over 1 2 6 2 2 1 ! ' 1
To ta I 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91! 91 91 91 91 ~ 91 91 91
.
-J
0'
~ I
: I
, .
I !
, I
i
I .
, i
I ,
! i
I
I
i
I
. I
, I
I :
I
I
! I
i i
I I
: I
I '
I ;
I
I '
I
-------
I
I .
[
.'.. - -. ~.... - _..._.- .-.....
.. An inspection of tables 4.7 and 4.8 shows a consistent pattern
of over-time impacts as de scribed in the previous section.
For
I
I'. .. ...-.. -
example, under strategy 1 (3 years, no additional cost sharing),
- .-. .----- --- .,-----_... ..._. -
- - - ..-.. .-... - .
changes in regional unemployment rates indicated in Table 4.7 in the
[-...-.... ..._- ..'._-
. year 1973 show only four AQCRs having a 0.5 percent or more increase
in unemployment rate.
In 1974, 14 AQCR 5 will experience more than
0.5 percent increase in the regional unemployment rate.
In 1975, the
-- -- ..------- -_.- -
--- - --.
. ----.- ---- ._-
'-----'----'-nuinbei of AQCR' s in the same category (over one .percent) 'jumps to
.- _. --. ---.....--
29 AQCRs.
Under strategy 2, which differs from strategy 1, in having a
. .u two year longer period of implementation, the number of AQCRs having
0.5 percent or more unemployment rate are 9, 20 and 7, for 1975,
1976 and 1977, respectively.
This suggests that a two year extension
reduces the number of AQCRs adversely affected (with more than O. 5
percent unemployment rate change).
The simulation of strategy 3
which implies a 59 percent cost sharing additional to that implied in
---- --- -.. --
-----. ..--. -.. -- strategy 1 indicate s that the number of AQCR s in the 0.5% unemploy-
ment rate increase group is 1, 1, and 6, for 1973, 1974 and 1975,
respectively.
Thus, the additional cost sharing in strategy 3 removes
most of the AQCRs from the group of moderately adversely affected
group.
S'trategy 4, which extends the time period to five years from
the three years used is strategy 3, is the most propitious strategy.
77
-------
.._._--_.. _. --
-----.--'.---" -
- --...----. --.---
_.-- .,. --. -..---.--.
--. .- - -
-..---- -------.---
Table 4. 8 .
Frequency Distribution of Major Variables for AQCRS.
(Strategies 5 and 6) .
Strategy 5 Strategy 6
Three Year
. . - .... --.., .- -. .... - u-
Straight With- Extended
out Assistance With Assistance
1973 1974 1975 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977
A. Annual Change of
--- Unemployment Rate -..... .-.__. . -.. .--. .,
(%) in AQCRs
Deer. (be tte r off) 10 4 13 12 5 7 17
. 01% to .49% 87. -74 55 77 79 86 .81 73
.--. . -.50% to . 99% ..0 4 10 25 1 3 1
1. 00% to 1. 49% 0 3 4
1. 50% and over 0 3
Total 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
.0 -
- B. Annual percent change .--- - - .--,... -- _._~- -----..-------- ---.--....
- --- -- ------
of Manufacturing Pro-
duction in AQCRs .0
Increase 2 15 1 4 1 6 38
-. 01% to -. 99% 87 75 48 90 87 87 80 50
-1. 00% to - 1. 99% 4 9 19 2 3 2
-2.00% to -2.99% 3 3 1 2 1
- 3. 0 0% to - 3. 99% - .0 2" 00 0
-4. 00% and over 2 4
T ota 1 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
..
C. Annual Percent change
_.
of Manufacturing In-
vestments in AQCRs
-4. 9% or Ie s s 79 37 19 91 90 74 64 84
- 5. 0% to - 9. 9% 9 32 30 1 14 21 5
-10.0% to -14. 9% 2 13 15 .. 2 3 1
----. .-15.0% to -19.9% 6 12 1 2 1
..
- 20. 0% and ove r 3 15 1
.---- _.- Total _. .. '---'-... ..
91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91
o .
D. Annual Percent Change
of Personal Income ...
Increase 3 4 .. 10 10 10 2 7 35
o to - 0.49% 86 75 55 80 81 87 81 54
-.50% to o. 99% 0 9 18 1 0 2 1
- L 00% to 1. 49% 1 1 4 2 0 0
. -1. 50% to 1. 99% 1 0 2 0 1
:.. 2. 00% and over 0 2 Z 1 0
Total 91 91 91 91 91 91 9-1 91
- - --~ -'---- --
:. 78.
. ~~.t..,~.. ~.
.'. .'- ,
'-~ - ..... ~', ..- '- :r,
. . ",r>.,-~.
~ .. :- ~'.r-).. -~.".-;- -...
. " , .~.-~.~.. -'.'
"~' ---.:.-~... ~..~ .
-------
- .
. .
'- .
',' .
..- ~ -..--...
Strategy 5 Strategy 6
. ..-.. - - ,_.' ----, .--. -- .--..-.,....'--..-. .-.,.--':" Three Year
" . --
Straight With- Extended
out Assistance With Assistance
1973 1974 1975. 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977
--E.. Annual C ha ng e in .. . .. ."" " '"
--.- - - .--..- --- ._._~-- - .-..- .--.-- "_...- -- . --.--.------------ -- -- ..'. '."
Government Revenue
Increase 3 4 10 10 10 2 7 35
0 to -0.49% 85 66 44 80 81 86 77 52
-- -- --=-0. 50% - O. 9 90/0 1 -13 --26 . .- --- --.. - ---1 -6 3
to
- 1. 00% to - 1. 49% 2 5 4 1 2 0
-1. 50% to - 1. 9 9% 1 1 1
,
-2.00% and over 2 6
- > - . -..-.. Total .. .. ... 91 - 91. 91 91 91 91 91 91 I
----.--------- --~
--.--...-----..-.-..,..-- ---.
- -_. - - '-.n_- ..', -.---
.... -- -" -_._-~. --~---
- ---'.",-,--,--- ..--'.-.. "'. . -
. ..-.- ".' -- - ---_. - . _. --- .-. ---
--- .--.,.-.....-..-... - ... .-.
. ..- ".-. --...-- .---- ..-. ---"'" - .
. .-... -.. - - _... - . - - -
- - '-'.._.
. - .. -.. '." ,'.
- - _.. --.'-'
.. .'. ..-.. -
- - - ". .. - . -.- -. ...
. .
. ..
'. .
" - -, .."- ..- .\.... - -""'-----'------.----
. . .
. .
---.--
- ---- ------...>.-._-- -_..
'--------
. .'
. ... .-- .,- -" .
.. . .-- ~ -
..,
~
79
.' I
. .'
-------
- - _.. .-.-- -
. -"-. -.. -.
The other four economic indicators evidence the same pattern.
Figures 4.1,.4.2 and 4.3 compare strategies 1, 2, 3, and 4
in terms of changes in unemployment rate.
Since the only difference
-_..._-----------_.~ .-- ------..--- ----._-" -_._-- - - - -----.---------..----.--.
. -----._u- - --
. - .--_. .
between strategies 1 and 3 is the time of implementation, the two-year
.- ---. --.---. -- ....-extension in strategy 3 improves a number of AQCRs.
. . .
Attention, how-
eve r ,
must be drawn to the fact that Figures 4. 1 and 4.3 refer to 1975
while Figures 4.2 and 4.4 pertains to 1976.
1976 is used for strate-
- --_.._- -_.
- - - - --.-- .-- ...
- -. ,,--... .. _.
. . ---- -. - -- " .
1------- ---.--m-gies 2 -and 4 because the time 'pattern of cost incidence is such that
I .
investment and operational costs peak in 1976 and the 1976 economy
- --. ... -- -- - - .
is closer in size to 1975 economy for comparison purposes.
- - .-. .
It should be noted that the moderately and seriously affected
AQCRs. in strategies 1 and 2 are found in the Manufactures Belt des-
cribed in the next sector.
D.
Geographical Patterns of Economic Effects
,,---
Appendix B provides the five economic indicators for the four
. ... ---.- _..
--~-~- .-
. strategies for all the-91 AQCRs .--An-examination of these tables sug-
---...----- ---
gests the following observations (some of which have been made):
The individual AQCRs have the same pattern of
differences among the strategies that were ob-
served while analyzing aggregate effects in 91
AQCRs (see Section B).
80
_c:~~:..!'-~ . "
-------
- - --- - - i . ._-
j
. Figure 4. 1 .' ..!" : I .
. I ,
Ge'ographic Distribution 0: ~conomic ~ :£ects in 1975 Mea:s,ured by Change 6£ Unemployment . ~ate:
Stra:egy 1.. Three-Year Straiglt Imp.ementation 1973-97:5 Wi:hout Government Financia. Assistance
Benefit = $1 o.. 0. Billion , . '
..' , , I I
! !.
: j , :
I : I: " "
\ ~. i.i! f\--'
-------
-
I '
Figure 4.2 .! ",' I
. . '. I : I'
Geographic Distribution 0: Economic ,~ffects in . 976 Me~sure( ,y C lange 0: 'lnem, .oyment Rate: ,
Strategy 2: Five Year ~xtended Impementat.ion 1973-77! Withou: Governmen: . !'inancialA ssis :ance
Benefit = $10 Billion . . . '
, .
I
"
~ f . .
I.
~ .
,
"
. 00'
tV
031
,
'1
',. c' 44 l'
/10'<;::.., I
.1 / .~ I
I
.I/"---\ I
.~~ j i
. ov.~ p ~
'yo '1:
~- I ,
.' . ...2 ~, J I '
,--.... :
I
I
.,
"
-048
027 I
I
I
I
I
t.
L -<
I
f
I
I
I .
i . . i i ,.
. I ~ I' !
~i""" "
-- I.!'. I ' . .
\ . I' . 1 ," . .' ......
~52 Z~"I "I,,' ",. \~"
'\ . j ~.~~;-; .11 i \; \f. '
~ 0l4' \,~i (V'75) i. ! 7 ~c)18~~~ '.
I '. '\ l'7r ~ ¥\ 16. 882(-)... 8'1~--. \~O
~----! " \ 9?~.16 50/ 1 80 '10 7~~~o' 61
4~5 ()85 \~201 wfE 3. ( . .
, . 780 1 2.. . . ~ I ' .
I . 042 \ ! 40 ' I' 39. ~ P.,) ;'."" . ~ .
~~{ (:il 36 024 \~ ',' ""'"
-{)20 r ~' ct . } , . y . :"
. \ 088 \91 . ~ : \ : '.~.-:----":.-.
'. . ,I ~-\ ,'.
451 \--~J--V-~.9\':'" .
034 15~",28~ ' :'."
~ . ~~ . .32 . '
/ . . \ '.".
'. I @ Serious, 10/0 or rnqre. . '~~ . .
\ CD Moderate, O. 5 to 0.999% '7
o Negligible, 0 to 0.499% ./
o Better Off, Negative %
, ,
-------
, I :'
, i ; ,I 1; "
\ -~i:'ii' ,'~
~52 "~ I \. \~i~
~ (, \/Ii ~ I ' 77~98~\ ( \7'
\ 1';\\.1.. 4 ! ~i 75)) 7 Ii 0~ . .:,) . -1 ~ "
!\ Q " 1'7 t ~' 16.. 8 L..--' ~
. ' . r-1 .06 . . 8~. 1\.d'30
~~! "9~-=\ 5. 1 80 . 10cx.~0 t~y 61
~55 t;\85 020, 0(~3. . (); ~. 686<-~A; ,. 94
43 (.) Q 64 I 8 7~ :C!) .' ~~-.:. ) .
~ . 0 ,13 \ 33 38~~~{~} 7\1, -90
~ ~ 072 ~5 3~~ -J/ .<) (Wi~~) .
022 . \ i ' J \" -9 I ) \j t
099 t 9~,' -'619 ~y 7:0 ~~2 ' "
J \-1 7e . <>-./)
L . /-;',J 071 70 09 3 "~-f .
l ~4~ \ \0 , 39. .~V
~~{ (.' 36 \024 '\.~ "
820 r \ : () ). , y
" \'} 088 i 9l'~ \
. " C !,(.)~~
45? ",~-k ,.~. '\'
034 15~~ -V 9.
~/ . '. .32
,{;..J . Serious; 1% or mor~ ,\ .'
, \1 ,() Moderate, O. 5% fo, o. 999% ~ '. .
"~ e Negligible, 0 to 0.499% -=;7
o Better Off, negative % ';'
figure'" 3 ,I ' " :
'G eographic Distribu :ion of Economic E :£ects in 975 IVeasured by Change 0: Jnemp~o~ment ~ate:
, '.
,Strategy 3: Three Year Straight Implemen:ation ' 973- !975 wi:h Governmen: Financial Assistance
B,enefit = $10.0 Billion' " , .' , .
I
I
1
I
! .
! '
.00
v.J
I'
827 I
i
I
!
I.
l '
I
I
I '.
, c. ' 44 I
/ ~'~~ I
"
"
,;
I
/---\ I
.~~ .J I
(>\/--- P ~
. . 2/(;;:
. v- ;, ;
-...-.r' [I
'.
. .
. '
. .
. .
_.;.._~--_..-:-..::. .-.'
-------
Figure 4.4 . '. ! . . I
. v
's=- (072 (.) 3~~- ~.3.~' .''1 (W~\~2J'
-, " Z'5 ~~" <~ . I
~22 9~ :. 4"19 W 730 ~92
099 i . ~! . /. :.~~
1 \.. . 70 '-' 3 ~./)
L . /-~.J . 71 ~ 0 . ~9 P
I . ~4~ \ \0, 39. ..~ '
~~{ (. " ~6\~24 '¥ ...:.
034 15~~ . .
7 .' "': 32
. r,j~ . . Serious. 1"10 or mpre . . \~
\ . () Mod~r~te, 0.5 to 0.999% :f
. 0 Neghglb1e, 0 to 0.4990/0 .,.
o Better Off, ne;gative %
... ~---. .
'... h0~1.~'
5. .' 053 . .
i ..... ~ ..../
:. . \0~6 .
. .. 6
; I
. .
.'
. i
,
, .
. 00
*'"
I
1.048
:t
I
I'
II
\
.\
I
/~, I'
:..2 J I
~(\-. P ~
. 2/0 '1
. . .~- \ I
. .'--'~ .:
I
I
.,
I
. c' 44 !
/ ~''':'~ I
'.
,j
Ii :
"
054
61
94
-90
027
I
I
i
i
J.
I
. .
-------
. ~--_._. ~. --..--. ~ ..~':However, the individual AQCRs have widely vary-
. .ing effects in the same strategy. For example,
some AQCRs such as San Diego are
actually "better off" in unemployment and personal
income changes in Strategy 1, while Steubenville
--------.--..----- and Sc'ranton show more than 1. 7 percent increase'
in unemployment.
.. ..
-----.
-'----'-- --_.---- --_." -"~_. .--The direction of different economic indicators are
consistent for an AQCR in a strategy. However,
the magnitude of the effect may be different depend-
ing upon the size and industrial composition of the
economy. For instance, under Strategy 1,
- "Birmingham, Alabama, has an unemployment rate
- ._---~-- _._._-_._._.~._-------_._..__.
. --increase of 1. 30 percent and regional personal'
income drop of 2.1 percent while Billings, Montana,
had the same unemployment effect (1. 73 percent)
but only O. 98 percent decline in personal income.
This difference is ascribable partly to the lower
percent of personal income derived from manufac-
turing in Billings.
- -'- . -------_.- ----_.~
. - -_. ._------.
These are very broad and general observations.
They tend to
conceal the geographic patterns of adverse economic effects.
If Ilmixed't
strategies are to be designed to achieve some degree of equity among
regions, the geographic patterns of adverse effects and the reasons
behind these must be understood.
- - - - - .-.
- --- ---- . _._--~------_. - .-- '-. .-
. - --. --
To develop thi sunde r s ta nding .of the_.ge og r. a,pl;1j.'£_p'aJte".r.!l~,.~a- _Il~1p.-
ber of AQCRs that experienced moderate and severe adverse economic
effects are selected.
Two criteria were used in this selection.
85
. - .". -::.::.; ~\-c:- - +
_. - --. ~ ~..~. --.-,'
. .
~1>.
,':---,-- -.~.,,_..,--,---,
-------
,.-.
.....---.-,----,-,_c.--,---.:....:.-...::..:.-=.._c_-,-.._.-Select all theAQCRs that experienced ~ 5 to 1. Q.
. -". percent .or ~or~ u~employme.nt rate increase and
display these two groups of AQCRs under the
following strategies (Table 4.9 - 4.13).
-. ". .
- -".. .- .--.-.----.--
- ---"'-----.
---- ---- -------'-----;.--For each of the four strategies .(!- through 4), select
and 'display the AQCRs that: (a) show 20/0 or more
reduction in manufacturing production; (b) show 15%
..-- -- --'- - -_.____.or more reduction in manufacturing investment;
(c) show 1% or more reduction in personal income.
Tables 4. 14 through 4. 16 display the AQCRs that
meet this criterion.
-'4..__._. ------- -
Seven AQCRs experienced 1% or more and 26 others between 0.5
------.----.-------.--...--.--.---..-. -- - --.----. ----
- --...-.---.----.-..--.--....-. --._---- --_. -..---
.- _.---~O... -----. --- .-_._--
... --._----- --..-----.-.---.. .--
to 1% increase in unemployment rate.
Other economic indicators
(Tables 4.10 - 4.13) of the four implementation strategies are provided
for these 33 AQCRs to p'rovide a more balanced view of the economic
effects of the four basic implementation strategies.
In general, there is
a consistent pattern of behavior of the various indicator s within one
strategy and among strategies.
Table 4.14 through Table 4.16 and Figures 4.7 through 4. 9 tell
the same story.
They identify AQCRs that are moderately and severely
affected in terms of manufacturing production, investment and personal
.0- ------.---..--- -_.-
--------.------ -- - --.-.-- - -.- "
income.
The single most important characteristic evident from these table s
and figures is the per sistence of a set of metropolitan areas enclosed
by the so-called American "Heartland" Manufacturing Belt in every list.
86
-r- _.~ ,':' ,-~ . ~"7"-~"~-
.. ..' ~ 'L'~
-------
lab1e 4.9 -,
% Change in Unemployment of Se1eGted AQCRs
Under Alternative Strategies
."~-
.-u.-...--. --_-.:-=..;..:.-__:_-_:. -_..~.:::-. :":""'---=--_-:'~~--,-_._---:--:;::_--;=_.:.. -..:. - ._::"_;-':",;';.--"_":":":'....::..; ~_.-- -.;'.- .--=-.-=-=--..::..:.........;-=-- .:':'=~-_.'.:":~-:-_~-=-=_::,--=_:,,:,:.:-::_....:.:. . - - -..-"':'-." ..:..---_.:....- :'-.-'--' ..-
. . . .
Strategy 1
No Ext.
Without
-- H__.__- - GovL Asst.-'
1975
1.089
d,_- ----1.296
1.730
1.310
1. 500
1.780
1.226
Selected AQCRs
G r ou p 1
8 Pittsburgh, Pa.
36 Birmingham, Ala.
38 Steuvenville, Ohio
54 Billings, Montana
63 Bakersfield, Calif
76 Scranton, Pa.
80 Y.9ungs.town, Oh~
-------
Table 4.10.
0/0 Change in Manufacturing Production (Value -Added)
of Selected AQCRs Under Alternative Strategies
. .
-- ---- -_-:......:_---:..;..---~..: - :_----:.--.._- --:.=-=-:=-:..L:'. :...:.....- ~:..:.-:...;.-_.:::...:.......:.:~~-=-.:. - :::- .:-.. _:---:..:-=....:..=...:::.-.;:..:.:-=~--=--:~...:.-- ...:...:::..:.-:-:---:.=--...:....._-=-:.-=-.-:~_..:..-.....:_._,...:...:.:-:..._.~---
-." .----.-_0 .- -. '" ---
-_.-.. ".
.- --- -
Selected AQCRs
---._..-. -- --
Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 SU'ategy 4 !
No Ext. 2-Yr. Ext. No.Ext. 2-Yr. Ext. I
.:yv'ithout Without ! With With I
Gp'~t-:-'.AssC-,Govf:-'As-sC-"'G6vC--Asst~' I Govt. "Asst',---1
-- ....-.._-.
Group 1
8 Pittsburgh, Pa.
36 Birm.ingham, Ala." - .
38 Steuvenville, Ohio
54 Billings, Montana
63' Bakersfield, Calif
76 Scranton, Pa.
80, Youngstown, Ohio
1975
- 3.26
-:.:- 4.84 ", ..
- 8.76
- 5.00
- 8.89
- 2.21
-- _.-..2.95..
1976 1975
- 1. 94 - 1.45
'-' 2.71 - '--" - 2.14
- 6.4 1 - 3. 52
- 4..74 - 1. 94
- 7.45 - 3.52
- 2.29 - 0.90
- .-.
'.., .._::_1.8~_..___--,. - 1:23
. ,-
1976
- 0.87
-1.21
- 2.57
- 1.85
- 2.95
- 0.93
- 0.83
.. - -
." -.
----- .....
------- .- -- --- .-.- ---
Group 2
5 Detroit, Michigan - 0.84 ..' - 0.56 - 0.36 - 0.24
9 sf.. Louis, Missouri - 1.19 - 0.85 - 0.49 - 0.35
16 Buffalo, New York -. 1.61 - 1.11 - 0.70 - 0.45
17 Milwaukee, 'Wisconsin - 1.08. - 0.84 - 0.44 - 0.35
19 Louisville, Kentucky - 0.44 - 0.32 - 0.17 - 0.12
37 Toledo, Ohio - 1. 26 - 0.94 - 0.51 - 0.38
43 Oma ha, Nebraska - 0.41 - 0.51 - 0.13 - 0.19
45 Port Arthur, Texas - 3.50 - 2.69 - 1.41 - 1.08
52 Fargo, N. D. - 2.17. ..--.- - 1.93 - 0.88 - 0.78
61 Allentown, Pa. - 1.83 - 1.33 - 0.79 - 0.57
64 Davenport, Iowa-Ill. - 1.04 - 0.75 - 0.46 - 0.33
68 Harrisburg, Pa. - 1.52 - 1.44 - 0.63 - 0.5-9
70 Knoxville, Tenn. - 0.95 - 0:94 - 0.39 - 0.38
72 Peoria, Illinois - 1.17 - 0.99 - 0.48 - 0.41
75 Saginaw Bay City, Mich. - 1.29 - 1.10 - 0.53 - 0.44
77 Syracuse, N. Y. - 1.20 - 1.09 - 0.49 - 0.44
82 13 inghamton, N. y',-- .-- "'-:-0" 6 0' - ----- '.. 0.63 ,. 0.22 0.25
. . - - -
84 Charleston, "Y. Va. - 1.11 - 0.92 - 0.46 - 0.38
85 Des Moines, Iowa - 1.80 - 1.51 - 0.73 - 0.61
86 Fresno, California - 1.54 - 1.32 - 0.63 - 0.53
89 Johnstown, Pa. - 1.05 - 1.12 - 0.42 - 0.46
90 Lancaster, Pa. - 0.93 - 0.90 - 0.37 - 0.37.
93 Raleigh/Dur ham, N. C. - 1.07 - 1.04 - 0.44 - 0.41
94 Reading, Pa. - 2.23 - 1. 74 - 0.93 - 0.72
97 South Bend, Indiana - 0.65 - 0.60 - 0.26 - 0.24
98 U tica- R orne, N. Y. - 1.42 - 1.10 - 0.60 - 0..46
,
88
-------
. '.
.1 able 4. 11 .
0/0 Change' in Manufactur ing Investment of
Selected AQCRs Under Alternative Strategies
"'.-.-.- ---
. . - - .
.~. -. -..._. ---.
-- .. .. -0 .
. -.. ...-..-. .....~.- --.-..,- .._-.. ----.
. .- - ,-. .
.~ ..-.... ... .
.-. --. - . - .
+.. .+-' -...---.- -.---...----.. - ----- .----:...-.::...-.'::-'--..--
-. - --- ...---- - - .
1__,..
Strategy 1 St.rategy 2 Strategy 3 Stl'ategy 4 I
No Ext. 2 - Yr. Ext. No.Ext. 2 - Yr. Ext. I
i
Selected AQCRs Without Without I With With I
_.. . ... - . Govt. Asst. Gov\:. Asst. Govt. Asst. : Govt. Asst.
Group 1 1975 1976 1975 1976
8 Pittsburgh, Pa. -28. 11 -20.46 -10.24 - 7.49
36 'Birmingham, Ala. -..-. -58.81' -38. 75 -18.66 -12.78
38 Steuvenville, Ohio -28.50 -19.39 -10. 13 - 7. 06
, . Billings, Montana -39. 58' -36.80 -13.40 -12. 13
63 Baker sHe Id, Calif -76. 14 -66.42 -22.82 -19.51
76 Scranton, Pa. -35.07 -49.01 -12.38 -15.15
- . ~--
80 _Young s to\vn, Ohi.o. -33.29 -28. 13 -12.11 - 9.96
.- --- __0___._- _.. "- -. ,. . ,- .. -~-_. - --.-. - .. -
--... , . - . -
Group 2
5 Detroit, Michigan - 9. 09 - 6.43 - 3.60 - 2.56
9 St. Louis, Missouri -19.34 -13.26 - 7. 17 - 4.98
16 Buffalo, New York '-16.42 -13; 11 - 6.26 - 4.95
17 Milwaukee, Wisconsin -18.85 -14.90 - 7. 02 - 5.55
19 Louisville, Kentucky - 7. 70 -4.52 - 3.01 - 1. 79
37 Toledo, Ohio -16.08 - 11. 77 - 6.03 - 4.45
43 On1.a ha, Nebraska - 8.00 - 8.35 - 3. 10 - 3.20
45 Port Arthur, Texas -18.61 -14.24 - 6.85 - 5.26
52 Fargo, N. D. -'-14.35 -19.21 - 5.47 - 6.88
61 Allentown, Pa. -10.25 - 8.97 - 4.07 - 3.51
64 Davenport, Iowa-Ill. - 4.98 - 4.94 - 2.05 - 1. 99
68 Harrisburg, Pa. -21. 71 -24.03 - 8.02 - 8.44
70 Knoxville, Tenn. -11. 71 -13.34 - 4.55 - 5.02
72 Peoria, Illinois - 8.30 - 7.40 - 3.28 - 2.90
75 Sagina\v Bay City, Mich. - 2.94 - 2.53 - 1. 19 - 1. 02
77 Syracuse, N. Y. -12.87 -12.74 - 4.98 - 4.83
-82' -Binghamton, N. - Y; _u.- - ------. 9.-97 ---.- .-. - --10.28 -.- 3. 88 ---..- ~ . _. - -3.96-- -
84 Charleston, W. Va. - 8.31 - 7.00 - 3.27 - 2. 75
85 Des Moines, Iowa -23.05 -19.77 -8.50 - 7.25
86 Fresno, California -12.08 -12.04 - 4.66 - 4.55
89 Johnstown, Pa. - 5.52 - 7.95 - 2.20 - 3.09
90 Lancaster, Pa. -15.55 ~15~32 "' 5~ 91 5.69
- -
93 Raleigh/Durham, N.C. - 7.67 - 8.86 - 3.04 - 3.42
94 Reading, Pa. -35.21 -29.80 -12. 16 -10. 14
97 South Bend, Indiana. - 6.24 - 6.66 - 2.48 - 2.62
98 Utica-Rome, N. Y. -24.22 -21. .05 - 8.91 -' 7. 62
,
89
-------
Table 4. 12 .
% Change in Regional Personal Inco.me of
Selected AQCRs Under Alternative Strategies
- ...__._--,-~-....-
". ..
.... ---'-.~"-_.
. . -.-.
. ---'.---.' .-. ----.--..--.-- .,.-.-- .
I
Selected AQCRs
, ,
, ,
-. ..- .
i
,
,
i
,
I -. - -, - ..
G r ou p 1
8 Pittsburgh, Pa.
36 Birn'lingham, Ala.
38 Steuvenville, Ohio
54 Billings, Montana
63 Bakersfield, Calif
76 Scranton, Pa.
80- _Y oungstown, Ohio - u-
. -.-- -- -.
G r ou p 2
5 Detroit, Michigan
9 SL Louis, Mis s ouri
16 Buffalo, New York
17 Milwaukee, Wisconsin
19 Louisville, Kentucky
37 Toledo, Ohio
43 Omaha, Nebraska
45 Port Arthur, Texas
52 Fargo, N. D.
61 Allentown, Pa.
64 Davenport, - ~~\-I'a-Ill.
68 Harrisburg, Pa.
70 Knoxville, Tenn.
72 Peoria, Illinois
75 Saginaw Bay City, Mich.
77 Syracuse, N. Y.
'-82 Binghan1ton, N.- Y;
84 Charleston, W. Va.
85 Des Moines, IQwa
86 Fre sno, California
89 Johnstown, Pa.
90 Lancaster, Pa.
93 Raleigh/Durham, N. C.
94 Reading, Pa.
97 South Bend, Indiana
98 Utica-Rome, N. Y.
- ---. - -.- -...
. -.. - .
.. --- -...u.- _. -.. ,..-----.......
- ...-.---....... .-----.--..------ ---....---------..---..... .
- --. - .--..-
, '
-0.49
-0.61
-1.01
-0.83
-0.47
-0.76
-0.30
-4.53
-0.42
-0.98
-0.69
-0.60
-0.51
-0.70
-0.77
-0.65
- --- - '-0.44
-0.90
-0.78
-0.35
-0.61
-0.69
-0.35
-1. 14
-0.50
-0.90
-0.37'
-0.43
-0.67
-0.66
-0.38
-0.60
-0.28
-3. 52
-0.27
-0.67
-0.46
-0.49
-0.41
-0.55
-0.62
-0.52
- --0.-39- on
-1., 03
-0.63
-0.26
-0.52
-0.60
-0.29
-0.85
-0.40
-0.67
Strategy 1 Strategy 2 St'rategy 3 Strategy 4
No Ext. 2-Yr. Ext. No. Ext. 2-Yr. Ext. ,I
Without Without I With With I
Govt. Asst. Govt. Asst. Govt. Asst. i Govt. Asst.
1975 1976 1975 1976
-1.56 -0.97 -0.68 -0.41
-'-2'. 09 -1.21 -0.93 -0.54
-6.42 -5.29 -2.60 -2. 13
-0.98 - 1. 43 -0.62 -0.45
-0.82 -0.66 -0.34 -0.26
-1. 23 -1. 08 -0.49 -0.44
.. ,,' "
,____-_1.90 .-._- - -1.19 -0.86 -0.53
- , . .. - - , ' .. . -.. . -.- -
- _-.h .-.-
90
-0.22 -0. 16
-0.24 -0.20
-0.44 -0.25
-0.34 -0.27
-0. 18 -0. 14
-0.31 -0.24
-0.10 -0.10
-1.81 +0.43
-0.18 -0.11
-0.42 -0.29
-0.2~ -0.20
-0.26 -0.20
-0.20 -0.16
-0.29 -0.23
-0.32 -0.24
-0.26 -0.21
'---0.16 '-'."..- -----0. 15.
-0.04 -0.37
-0.30 -0.26
-0. 13 -0. 12
-0.24 -0.19
-0.28 -0.22
-0.14 -0.11
-0.48 -0,36
-0.19 -0.16
-0.38 -0.28
--
-------
J.ab1e 4.13.
0/0 Change in Local Government Revenue of
Selected AQCRs Under Alternative Strategies
[-:--
I
. ".- .
- ..- ------.---.-.--.- ..:..~ ---=-..';;"'-=---'.;-_.:""':_"':-';'-
----.--- "--'-'~':'.:'-'.". .:..._..:.-:.. :.;-----
.. --
. --
.-- ---. --. -..'. - - . - ... .- ..
------.-- -. - - - - .... -_._--.-... .-- --.- - ----..-.--- ._- :_:__..:_-: --_..-=-.---- ._.__.-
Selected AQCR s
Strategy 1 Strategy 2
No Ext. 2-YT. Ext:.
Without Without
----'O"uo_.- ---
'GovL AssL -,GovC' Asst:.
--.-----1975 .1976
-2.28 -1.41
.- ""- -3.-10 .. . - 1. 80
-5.74 -4.74
-1.12 -1.63
-0.57 -0.45
-2.20 -1.93
. -. .-. _.._..::?_~ ~~ ._m. -1. 84
. --.---..--.-.-. ---. -.-.-
G r ou p 1
8 Pittsburgh, Pa.
36 Birrninghaln, Ala.
38 Steuvenville, Ohio
54 Billings, Montana
63 Baker sHe Id, Calif
76 Scranton, Pa.
80. Youngstown,. Ohio
Strategy 3
No. Ext.
, With
... Govt.' Asst.
1975
-0.99
..-1.38
-2.33
-0.71
-0.23
-0.88
-1.33
Strategy 4
2 - Yr. Ext.
With
'! Govt. Asst.-...
1976
-0.60
-0.80
-1.91
-0.51
-0. 18
-0. 78
-0.81
--" - --- --'-- -- ." ----- -
-_.-- --. . --.---
Group 2
5 Detroit, Michigan -0.64 -0.48 -0.29 -0.20
9 St. Louis, Missouri -0.94 -0.65 -0.37 -0.31
16 Buffalo, New York -0.96 -0.64 -0.42 -0.24
17 Milwaukee, 'Wisconsin -0.83 -0.66 -0.34 -0.27
19 Loui s vi He, Kentucky -0.67 -0.53 -0.25 -0. 19
37 Toledo, Ohio -1. 07 -0.83 -0.43 -0.33
43 Omaha, Nebraska -0.40 -0.38 -0.14 -0. 14
45 Port Arthur, Texas -4.60 -3. 56 -1. 83 +0.43
52 Fargo, N. D. -'-0.40 -0.25 -0. 17 -0.10
61 Allentown, Pa. -1. 56 -1. 08 -0.67 -0.46
64 Davenport, Iowa-Ill. -0.90 -0~61 -0.38 -0.26
68 Harrisburg, Pa. -0.85 -0.70 -0.38 -0.29
70 Knoxvi He, Tenn. -0.69 -0. 56 -0.27 -0.21
72 Peoria, Illinois -1. 07 -0.85 -0.44 -0.35
75 Saginaw Bay City, Mich. -0.97 -0.74 -0.40 -0.31
77 Syracuse, N. Y. -0.57 -0.46 -0.23 -0.19
82 .. Bingharn.ton, -N. 'Y~- ------ "----:"0. '36
... .. ...:0. 31 -0. 13 -0. 12
84 Charleston, W. Va. -1. 38 -1. 58 -0.06 -0.57
85 Des 110ine s, Iowa -1. 00 -0.80 -0.38 -0.33
86 Fresno, California -0.18 -0. 14 -0.07 -0.06
89 Johnstown, Pa. -0.80 -0.68 -0.32 -0.25
90 Lancaster, Pa. -1. 16 -1. 00 -0.47 -0.37
93 Raleigh/Durham, N.C. -0.46 -0.39 -0. 19 - O. 14
94 Reading, Pa. -1. 86 -1. 39 -0. 78 -0. 58
97 South Bend, Indiana -0.64 -0.52 -0.25 -0.21
.
98 Utica-Rome, N. Y. -0.85 -0.62 -0.35 -'0.26
I
i
,
'-91
-------
Table 4. 14
Comparison of Regions with Manufacturing Production
Decreased 2% or More in 1975 or 1976
1--
_. ._~ -~~ ~- _.4- _.--. _.._~. -- .--- -. - - . --.-. . "-- - ---=".-...--..-.-----:------.:'--....""':---:""'--'------:"".------:'-':"'----.----=-...~---_._._.,_._--- -------'-.----...--..----.--
-2.17
-5.00
-2.02
- -. -..
-8.89
-2.21
!---~
Selected AQCRs
8 Pittsburgh, Pa. - .-.
36 Birmingham, Alabama
38 Steubenville-Weirton/
Wheeling, West Va.
45 Beaumont-Port Arthur-
Orange, Texas
52 Fargo-Moorhead, N. D. ,
Minnesota
54 Billings, Montana
55 Sioux City, Iowa
63 Bake rsfield, Calif.
76 Scranton/Wilkes -Barre /
Hazelton, Pa.
80 Youngstown-Warren,
Ohio
94 Reading, Pa
-
.. --
-. --- - -- ------- - -_. -- ---- _. -
3 Yr.
(Without) 1975
-3.26
-4.84
.h
-8.76
-3.50
-2.95
-2.23
3 Yr
(\Vith) 1975
-1. 45
-2. 14
-3.52
.". .
-1.41
..
-0.88
-1.94
-0. 76
... -- ----'. -
-3. 52
-0.90
-1. 33
- o. 93
------ ------ ------------ ---- ----------. --'
~..._._-_._------~-------- .
.- - - --- - ---.... . .
92
. ~.-'-. - ,c----,.- ,~."
5 Yr.
(Without )1976
-1.94
-2. 71
-6.41
-
-2.69
.. --
-1. 93
-4. 74
-1. 9 1
--:"7.45
-2.29
-1. 86
-1. 74
5 Yr.
(With) 1976
- .87
-1.21
-2.57
- 1. 08
.. '-
- .78
-1. 85
- .73
.h --2.95
- . 93
. - .
- .83
- .72
-------
Table 4. 15
\"'omparisons of Manufacturing Investment Showing
a 15% or Greater Decrease in 1975 or 1976
"'.0_- .._-_..._~.~-.,- ------.
.. p,--_o_-_....."_..._... ""'.-.--..
.. ... . .. - ----- 3 Yr. 3 Yr 5 Yr. 5 Yr.
Selected AQCRs (Without)1975 ~Vith) 1975 Without)19 76 (Wit1i 1976
6 San Francisco, Calif. -23.88 - 8.59 -18.23 - 6.59
~., Pittsburgh, Pa. -28. 11 -10.24 -20,46 - 7.49
. .. -. .. . -
9.. St. Louis, Mis -19.34 - 7.17 -13.26 - '4.98
10 Washington, D. C. -24.42 - 8.67 -20.84 - 7.41
12 Daltimore, Maryland -15.84 - 6~08 -11.75 - 4.51
16 . Buffalo, New York '-16.42 - 6.26 -13.11 - 4.95'
17 Milwaukee, Wisconsin -18.85 - 7.02 -14.90 - 5.55
25 l?dianapolis, Ind. -22.19 - 8.07 -17.42 - 6.34
h1 Portland, Oregon -18.90 - 6.91 -14.60 - 5.42
36 Birmingham, Alabama -58.81 -18.66 -38. 75 -12.78
37 ..Loledo, Ohio -16.08 - 6.03 -11. 77 - 4.45
.. -_.-. - - .. .. - --- 0'.- -
38 Steubenville - Weirton -28.50 . -::10: 13 - .-- - '- 19. 39 . -- ..- '7.06
- --
Ohio/Wheeling, W. Va.
45 Beaumont-Port Arthur- :'18. 61 - 6.85 -14.24 - 5.26
Orange-Texas
52 .r argo-Moorehead, N.D., -14.35 - 5.47 -19.21 - 6.88
Minnesota
53 T'I:>ise, Idaho ... - 8.83 - 3.44 -16.75 - 6.07
r . Billings, Montana -39.58 -13.40 -36.80 -12. 13
- -
55 Sioux City, Iowa -133.60 -30.39 -118. 36 -25.66
63 Bakersfield, Calif. -76.14 -22.82 -66.42 -19.51
68 Harrisburg, Pa. -21. 71 - 8.02 -24.03 - 8.44
69 Jacksonville, Florida -15. 53 - 5.91 -14.66 - 5.49
76 Scranton, Wilkes Barre - -35.07 -12.38 -49.01 -15.15
Hazelton, Pa. '
78 Tulsa, Oklahoma -18.40 - 6.88 -20.29 - 7.29
80 Youngstown-Warren, -33.29 -12. 11 -28. 13 - 9.96
Ohio
85 DesMoines, Iowa - 2 3. 0 5 - 8.50 .. -19.77 - 7.25
88 Jackson, Mississippi -18.74 - .. 7. 02 -) 7.68 - 6.50
.. .. . .
90 Lancaster, Pa. -15.55 - 5.91 -15.32 - 5.69
92 Norfolk Portsmouth/ -16.86 - 6.41 -17.25 - 6.35
Newport News -Hampton,
Va.
94 Reading, Pa. -35.21 -12. 16 -29.80 -10.14
98 Utica-Rome, N. Y. -24.22 - 8.. 91 -21. 05 - 7.62
-.---.. . .'.... _0.-.. - --~~.._-.- ~---_.- --_:.... --.
.".-- --...-..-------..-'.--
93
: ~ -~"c ::':'~\ -.'
~~<~ - .- ---.----==-:-.'--
-------
J. able 4. 16
Comparisons of Regions With Personal Income
Decrease 1% or More in 197? or 1976
-.. -_.__._. - ._-, .- --......---- .
- ..._- . .---- ,-_. -..----.--...-----.-. - -.._-_._=---------..._-_.._-~--=-.-.._--_.--:.....---.~----..:..._._~-----.----.---..--...-- --_.. '..-',-- .._---.
--- .-
---- -0' , -, ..'.. , .
3 Yr. 3 Yr. 5 Yr. 5 Yr.
Selected AQCRs (WithouU 1975 (With) 1975 (Without) 1976 With) 1976
8 Pittsburgh, Fa. -, - - -. - 1. 56, - 0.68 - 0.97 - 0.41
-
16 Buffalo, New York - 1. 01 - 0.44 - 0.67 - 0.25
36 Birmingham, Alabama - 2.09 - 0.93 - 1. 21 - 0.54
38 Steubenville- W eirton,
Ohio /Wheeling, W. Va. - 6.42 - 2.60 - 5.29 - 2.13
45 Beaumont-Port Arthur, - 4.53 - 1. 81 - 3.52 + 0.43
Orange, Texas
54 Billings, Montana - 0.98 - 0.62 - 1. 43 - 0.45
76 Scranton/Wilkes Barre - - 1. 23 - 0.49 - 1. 08 - 0.44
- , -
- Hazelton, Pa. -_. -.._- ----- ------ -- ~---- .'. - . -- --- --- - -- - -
. --._-- . . . -- ----._-. - -- '0.-53'-' - ,-
80 Youngstown-Warren, - 1. 90 - 0.86 - 1. 19 -
Ohio
84 Char1estown, West Va. - 0.90 - 0.04 - 1. 03 - 0.37
94 Reaaing, Pa. - 1. 14 - 0.48 - 0.85 - 0.36
'."'.m" - -- ----- ---------
--...._---------- --------- ----- --- ----._-- .. -- -.._-- .-...
----.------.--. ._.._-- ------~-.----.-.-
--.. --.
94
-. - -..- .-'
-------
I
I
!
. j' I"
!
. I ;
, ,
. !"igure '-. 7 i .
Regions with Manufacturing Production Decreased. 20/0 or More in 1975 or 1976:
: .'
I
.,~~ i
}021. '\' ":.'"
[6, '. :
29-----------' . . :
.. .. \' '854
:)
I
i '.
. I
I
. I
027
041 I i
i
i
i
I
1-
L-
J
1
, .
. -D
U1
i 048
031
~
"
I
I
i.
I
"~I
. ~. \: :
. ;~(j( pJ-~-'1
I. c' 44 I "'-i/;;~.
. / 0,. : I. . . ~ v . I
1/ ~/. ~,
/ . ~ I . . ~- . ~ v-- .1
I 1.
. I
I . i
I' 1"
. ; ~
. .':; .i' 'i !:. ~'. .
~~!:!'ili'J~ .
'52 Z~ I ,!. I" \~
i . f ~/;;-')G0~ i !.'! 77 hi 8~\ { \~7' .
'\ t . 1// ) 1 I: 74 00' . I 4. Q
\ O~ 1'7[' 758\ .16. 82.ot 8 ~-- ~O ,.
~"-,I - . \1?~gJ06_._~7 1 8.0~;,b.~\~~1 61
. '::>5 085 IO~O, C597\37 .~B 68G~j. . 94
43 q . (064 I I 870, 33 .\~O>v -90
. \~ ~ 072 );953&2~~' jJ~:SJi\.:~J,' .' .
j 022' \ - I ~' 9 / ,) \j. .
. ,: 9~:' -()19 ~ 7:.oi'D'92 .
099! .~ '. / -------:Z,:h . .
L f\-:"J-O~70 093!~-!).
I 780 1 2.- . . .--0-~ . ,:.Pi
. I. 042 \ ! 40. " 39 \. '~;f :,'
~ I.' ( ,i 36 \ 024 ~;
'. ~01- ,!.!. \ . Y . /,
. \,) 088 i 91 . ~ ~ . . J i.
'. L-- I I,!) ~d i /.
O 34 4S! 28br.w....r"";--~~'9\ : I I,',
-lS~~~ i i
7 '.' \ 32 .; j:
'. f7 . ; \ 6' I '!
\ (\1 I" ~b?; ,".
'............. ' .;-.;/ : I
. --- ./ . J
! : ./ :!
! : ! .:
, , .
I ;
! :
, I
- -.
, :
I
. I
-------
- -._- - ~ - -
~-~~-- --
. ,
iI'
I
j
I
i
i.
-
,
)
" I
I: I:
; I
I: ,I
. Ii
I i:
I ! . I
r~ 1,1' il (\:,. °
\ Zo,.::' ;';' ;;:)' ')
.'52 ~A:~ I :! 'dl: ," \47 r'.
'\ j ~ ~r;~~' , : \,. ( \9/
? ,(, ;~J/G~ ,:,' i i 77.6S~\ ( i7'
\ ({/ ) . 7 ,1 0 ,) " Q
O~' 17) 75(9" 16 " - '8~L.--':~.p ,
" ' -' i \06 0 , S~0'-. i-- ,':030
,I -~ ) 5, ,~!O 'r-";-:&- ,
y.~-:::-:-. J -,--/: 11 gO: I OC(-, G:-->."--?/ c 1
- ! VL.00r\C\"/;::; 94
88.:> ~ \ u'; \-' ". uv81'" ). ,
, )064 870\ 33 3Q.\~ .. ~ -90
( 072 \ ,: 3 ~&?'/ 7-;J r'f~}'~J
'" " .:> (' ~\'-' 0 i- \ r ,
9~. ; / ~-Dl 9 ,\B): . ~ ..e, 7 3Q ~;_.~12
-,~, oj ,/ ~.:::")
\-1 ~~t)70 ,;(1';;,.'/
Q L IJ.--.J U7I 7-!?, 093 .'> ,
' 7v" 1 ' 2,.1' . , ~-\. ,,' ,
1',042 \ ~\' '~y::
L I /: j ", \ 0 24 8_3 Ii. 0 ;
-~~~ ~ ' , '\ ,)0 cy i::
, " ? l... \ i 1 . \ ' i:'
, O~o ~- \ ~ I ' ( .' Y I '
\ ) 808 \91 '; : J ,I
, /,'_i L--\ ~~~, , i
034 150j)~",---28Q[', ~,,J~ 69\ "
7 ~~'. ; , \032\ I
,(-:-~ : ,: : ,\ i
\ ' / :' ~~; I",
"~ ~
-"
, Figure ',.8 ,
Regions wi:h Manufac :uring :nve stmen: Dec"rease,<
I ,
I
I
5% or More in 1975 or 976:
I i
: I
N~ '
} 021. J\o ° 00.0
~o , ' .
/ 29---------' , ';
/ L. 854
, ~ \ r--
f .
) I-
\ :;
\.q6
,. 6
, ,
I
036 , 51,,,-r----l~
.63 <=1. .
03 ,
.'\.::; 03J
o~
I. G'..c..1 '"
j /0.-
,/ '~.; ! "
j / 'D
I /~\,
I.~~ \.
? /.~,.:>v-l_~
c\.o :/ ~"-
'--' , ~ I
'2/v I
'....' - ~ ,...,,;:::- . :1
l'
f
/
1
'-~\i
'.55
\
43 q
\,
022
.1
-
027 i
i
I
j
;_ol.
r
I
/
I
I
I "
099
/'
,I
,
i
:048
i
i
..
, !
I
, !
I
i
"
I
,
! .
-------
I
~ .
I
J
I
f
I
J
. I
027[
i
i
I
!
1-
L-
J
I
I
I
I
I
II! I'
, i
, '
J j.
i I: ;
! I:' 1;
I '~. .! .: I' ).1 J~.
\ . - 7 /7' , :. ; . I 1: / .
652 ?/~ ,1. I I .111~i.' \b~
. \ J ~ ./'~~ . ; \ I \ ',Y'
~ . J ~J/' "' ) j I I I \ f \~
1 Ol--t4' /// G/J ~5) :,' ~: ~ 7L f8aSdJ-8.~i 1 ,~ 085 I OC.O~-o~7\37~.: 8 62()~t~ j. . 94
"7.)y (064 (8/0; 33"".';!D-<::~90
\ i 072 \ n 3~:) 0 :>/'V/0"'-~f?".\l2,. .
'" "Z5 01.JL,..t (J 1 -";~/
y22 9 ~ . L~J;19 W 730 ~~2
099 .~ .1-' / ----~:.,
\.,-' ~~70 . i~./)
I 780 \- . 2..f~--.I 071 70 ~~09~p
!. 042 \ ! 40 ' . 39 ~"'~;li:'
~ I I. \ 36\024 8_3/ I..;:
,~'-; {I CY Ii
. 020 r ' . I . 1.. . y ! I',
. \ 1088\O~~ .I-i
0"'4 ",4~~ 2"Ar'1~-<-~~'9\. ',/ i
.)- 15~~""'-... o~ ". \ i
7 ~':', ' . 32 I
" //.. . -; ,\ 26' :i
\ I . ,,~I 1
.~ 9!)'
. "., ,:'
. , I i
, . !
, .,
: :
. Figure 4.9
Regions wit:l Persona. Income )ecreased 1% or ly,ore in 975 or 1976
N~
~ 021 i /
, ; '.. I? .
I' Itg~ \
. ~
. \ .
f
( ./
. \OQ6
6 .
-..0
-J
,
L
041 I
~-
031
. .
. ,
. ~/r---\ .:
. I
. .~ \ :
, c' ,,-<' .. ?....../;r.-v-'~ .
!' /0'- -, '. /,/0 . I
, / ~., I '. "...../r ,
I / I . .;-- "
''C:>, "'--~~ 'f
. i
,!
. i
854
I'
'I
:048
I
I
I
,
, "
I
,
I
: !,
i
I :
, I
-------
---
---~-_-:"_:"_:_-"'--'-~'-'---=-The-Heart1and Manufacturing Belt has been described by ge~g_-_.-
- .. . .
.. ----------..- ~.._. :.-
---
rapher-;;~d ~-egiona1-~~~~~~i~-t~--~-;the a-;;ea -that:-deveio'pedwestwards'-
----------.--- -
from New York in the area bounded by Lake Superior iron ores, the
_._- ...---.-- ..._~-- .
-._------ .-.
."--- .... --,._-
.. -. -.- -p.-.-
. - _.. -- -
. -
. -. --. -.
- ._. . __"0--
Pennsylvania coalfields and the capital, entrepreneurial experience
-_. - -----
-- --and engineering trades of the northeast United States. >:' In the phase
of American growth associated with iron and steel, this area emerged
as the heavy industrial center of the country, and has remai~ed the
-._--- - _.-
center -of national demand," determining patterns of market acces sibility
since 1870.
Figures 4.10 and 4.11 show the urban centers of the manu-
facturing belt emerging in 1870 and continuing to be important in the
national urban system to 1960 (the major difference being the emerg-
ence of Pacific and southwest by 1960).
Since 1870, this area has
grown into the urbanized center of the national market while subsequent
metroplitan growth has been organized around this national core re-
gion.
Continued spread of population to the west and modern higher-
order industries (e. g., aerospace) suited to the local amenities have
-.--- - ---.- -----.
0"_.- .-
- -- --- n ---. ._-
. ----. .-------- - --.. --_.- --- - -- - ~ -
>:'For a fuller discus sion of this concept, see: (1) Pred, Allan; ---------;--.-.
The Spatial Dvnamics of U. S. Urban-Industrial Growth, 1800-1914,
Cambridge, The MIT Press, 1966; (2) PerIoH, Harvey S., Dunn, E. S.,
Lampard, E. E., and Muth, R. F., Regions, Resources and Economic
Growth, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins Press, 1960; (3) Ullman, E. L.,
"Regional Development and the Geography of Concentration, II Papers
of the Regional Science Association, 1959; and (4) Berry, Brian J. L.,
and Neils, Elaine, Location, Size and Shape of Cities as Influenced by
Environmental Factors, Chicago, University of Chicago, Decem1;>er,-
1967.
--. . . "--.-+. ----+-
98
-------
_.
. "" . ... ~.-. -- , .. 0..
_._- ..--..---- ---_._-- -- -- - -- -.---.--- -. --.....:...---.-..----:..:.. --:.:...--:-.
Figure 4.10
- ~.. '..--
..-. .._- --'-----.'-.,..-..-..
. . '. '. . .
n'- ....--.--- - -_..._---- h_..._- ---...
- - .. .q - ,
--.. _.. -.- .--. -_. -. -'--.----.....-..-, -------. ._- -. .._".
.The Emergence.of..Manufacturing Belt Urban Centers, 187(J)
--.< -- -'-. '.. - -..-._.._--------_.- -----.--...-----...---------------------
!- .--
------. .....
._- _nO -. -
----_. -".-.---- -----
--------- .
[-.-- -- -.- . ----
I
---.------.-
-- ._-~...- .-...--_.
Figure 4. 11
The Persistence of Manufacturing Belt Urban Centers,
1960
--- --'~._---_._-
Source:
Berry and Neils,
£E.
cit.
99
. ....-:, 1~ '
-------
--.
--_.__._--"---_.:.._~-_.1gd, topX9ces.~ing, ser:v:ke and modern 10w~emis sion industries. outside
...-- .' -.-'-""
-"------th'~ -heartL3.nd.
-- -- -.... - -. ~ -.
. ...-. --_....
--.. .' - .-. _.-..-- .-.-- . --,. _.- - .-- ---.--. --.- -_. --.
- _.. -----
The manufacturing belt has thus been "a great heartland
nucleation of industry and the national market, the focus of large-scale
----"'-
..-.-.:"--------_u -. -----_... .----.. ---. --+-
-- . _. . ,.- .- .- --
- - . - _. p -
-.. _national serving industry the seedbed oLnew industry responding to the
-- ..' ---...-., --_._--
--_d¥.nami~- structu~_e of national demand and the center of high levels of
per capita income. "
The incidence of control costs on the AQCRs in the manufacturing
i-------'---- -------------belt is inevitable, given its industrial preeminence (see Appendix C ).
I .' .
However, given its persistent role as the lever of successive deve10p-
ment of national regions, the adverse economic effects in the AQCRs
inside the manufacturing belt (Figure 4.7 - 4.9) warrant some caution.
The adverse effects on:these AQCRs in the manufacturing belt may get
impacted throughout a large part of the national economy. The design
of the "mixed" strategy may help to alternate these AQCRs.
E.
The "Mixed" Strategy
- . ..-. .. -. .
-.--+... ----. --------_. .. - -.
The mixed strategyis _essential~y a Irlix:~!e__of different trea!:- ------.
----- ----
ments of different AQCRs in one strategy in the light of previous analy-
sis of aggregate over time and geographic patterns of economic effects.
It is intended to provide for a high degree of spatial equity in the inci-
dence of adverse economic effects.
100
.' .
,,::>~-,., ~. .,---;0'
. ". "."- ...-. ~ ~ .-
~.._~---:~ - . ~ .
'-'.---~C;--;-c'-.~-
." >1<-;:-;".-
-------
-
------'----~-';"_.:.,:,--_..,....:.-,-..:-:....:.Tb~_.mixed, s,trate gy ,chosen _c:2nsi~ ts, o~:., U"-" .,......:...=----.- -. --'.. -'---,.:----...-'....c:...:...-..----...-.--.
..-- .~------- _._._. ----'..- '-----"----'--~
a.
58 AQC'Rs' simulated exactly asunder strategy 1
~- -.- -. -..-.-
b.
13 AQCRs as under strategy 2
------- .. -------.---- .~_.._-_.
- -- .~_..._- - --. .----
-. ..--. ---
. .-.- -..- - ..-.
. -.- . ....,..-..- -.-- .. ~
-..-----..
--c;:. , 14 AQCR:s as under st~ategy 3
.-. ---.. -.
. -.--- - -- - - .- .-..-. .-. ------
..~~~ AQCRs as under .s~r~tegy 4
... - -- -- - .-- - --.--.-.. --- ~.
- .- _.- .- - .. - -. .
e.
2 AQCRs with 75% additional government
financial assistance and two-year extension
The identity of these AQCRs in each category is indicated in
--_.- --.-----....- ---_.- --- - ._--
------'.-..--- --- ---------------.-.----- --- ------'- --- - -~----'._..- ----'-"------'---'---,~- --. ---.--..-
Table 4.17.
The performance of the AQCRs in the mixed strategy can be'
observed in the following manner:
Appendix B indicates the performance of 58
AQCRs under strategy 1
Table s 4. 9 - 4. 12 indicate the performance
of the AQCRs in groups (b), (c) and (d), above
Table 4.18 shows the performance of the two
AQCRs -- Steubenville and Scranton
The mixed strategy brings the unemployment down for every AQCR
.- -. -- --.
under O. 5%.
Economic hardship as judged by the criterion has been
.-- -- -------.----.-----.-.------ ..-.---.-----.--
reduced to acceptable levels in all'AQCRs, though this has meant 75%
additional government financial assistance to two AQCRs.
101
. -, ~'- . -. - --~~'~"'-''--'!~''''
"";:.--'.:~' ~- - . ''''''0;' '-"
-' . .
..h. "
'~..-..-': -
''''-''-''--- -".--'=-"
. ':~.,
-------
TABLE 4. 17
:--~_._._._--_..:.:;...:_----_.~. ----_:.---:=::.. -.-.-.-.-... "-'. ....'~,-,::.:..-.,-:'-_.,:. . - '.
--_._--- ---. . GROUPING OF AQCRs UNDER -MIX.~riSTR-A'iEG-Y-~--"~~~'-:-=-:~~~~~==~~~-"---:==~-~-~~~--
. _. --- ..---.----------------------... - .
a. 58
AQCRs
Under - -.-- --
Strategy 1
-----------.------------------.
- "- -- -_.::.." . ':"":---'--':-:---=""::_:":-0'"_'_';":'''; --.--=-.:...- -~~_.-......------=--_.-._-
._--- - - -. ------ ._-_. .--.
- "- 1 New York, New Yqrk ---- .__44 Honolulu, Hawaii
2 Chicago, Illinois 46 Charlotte,' North Carolina
3 Los Angeles, California 47 Portland, Maine
4 'Philadelphia, Pa. 48 Albuquerque, New Mexico
6 San Francisco, California 49 Lawrence-Haverhill/Lowell,
7 Boston, Mas sachusetts Mas sa'chusetts --.- -.
'-----------10' Washington, D. C.'--- _._------50El Paso, Texas --.---------------------.-
11 Cleveland, Ohio . 51 Las Vegas, Nevada
12 Baltimore', Maryland 53 Boise, Idaho
14 Minneapolis -St. Paul 55 Sioux City, South Dakota
Minnesota 66 Grand Rapids /Muskegon-
15 Houston, Texas Muskegon Hts., Michigan
18 Cincinnati, Ohio 67 Greensboro, North Carolina
20 Dallas, Texas 69 Jacksonville, Florida
21 Seattle-Everett, Washington 71 Nashville, Tennessee
22 Kansas City, Missouri 73 Richmond, Virginia
23 San Diego, California 74 Rochester, New York
,24 Atlanta, Georgia 78 Tulsa, Oklahoma
25 Indianapolis, Indiana 81 Albany-Schenectady- Troy,
26 Miami, Florida New York
27 Denver, Colorado 83 Charleston, South Carolina
28 New Orleans, Louisiana 87 Fort Wayne, Indiana
29 Portland, Oregon .88 Jackson, Mississippi
30 Provldence-Pawtucket, 91 Mobile, Alabama
Rhode Island 92 Norfolk-Portsmouth/
31 Pho~nix,' Arizona --.. -.----------- Newport News -Hampton, Va.
32 Tampa, Florida 95 Rockford, Illinois
33 Columbus, Ohio 96 Sacramento, California
34 San Antonio, Texas 99 Wichita, Kansas
35 Dayton, Ohio 100 York, Pa.
39 Chattanooga, Tennes see
40 Memphis, Tennessee
41 Salt Lake City, Utah
42 Oklahoma City, O~lahoma
"-- --A .-- -'. -
. -.'-;
- +-- --'..- ... ----
,?
J 02
-------
TABLE 4. 17 (cont'd)
-..---. ---* ~- -
.. -~..- - _.
---~-_"':"_'._':~'-']j:- 1"3"" AQCRs ,n. --~--- ~'.-=-='::~,:..=:==--::--:..:::. .:..---. :-c-~~,-'14' - -AQCRs - - _h__. ;.,...__..__-:..-;:..::.:-..:..~.::-.:-==-~-:.-:...':':.";"_:'-_._...:...__-:...:.._-----.-
_n n' nn" -.. ;L.__--- Under ,.-' .-.--, ~~'-:===::::::-:"-=n::::=-'::-':-="::.=:::::.uride-i'.- . :,,:~~==-=-===='--'--"'--.---...::::==~-==.,
Strategy 2 Strategy 3
1--__-
5 Detroit, Michigan.. n__._______8__~ittsburgh, Pa.
9 St. Louis, Missouri 17 Milwaukee,' Wisconsin ------------ -.
16 Buffalo, New York .-. - -"19, Louisville, Kentucky' - '. . -'_'_--__n__. -
43 Omaha Nebraska 37 Toledo, Ohio
" 52 Fargo, North Dakota ---.-45 'Port Arthur, Texas
64 Davenpo'rt, Iowa 61 All ntown, Pa..
68 Harrisburg, Pa. 75 Saginaw
70 Knoxville, Tennessee Bay City, Michigan
. 72 Peoria, Illinois 77 Syracuse, New York
_~2_)31!1ghamton, !'T~w_.XoE~_.__.- 84 Charleston, West Virginia
86 Fresno, California -85 '-Des"Mofnes,' Iowa'- ---. -.._------------
90 Lancaster, Pa. 89 Johnstown, Pa.
97 South Bend, Indiana 93 Raleigh/Durham, North Carolina
94 Reading, Pa.
98 Utica-Rome, New York
- ---.--- - -_..--. -- -- -
d. 4 AQCRs
Under
Strategy 4
e. 2 AQCRs
With
75% Gov't Assist.
36 Birmingham, Alabama
54 Billings, Montana
63 Bakersfield, California
80 Youngstown, Ohio
38 Steubenville, Ohio
76 Scr.anton, Pa.
..-_..- ----.---- ~- ------
. -- ._.--- .--
----.--'-'- -.---- --- ----.---------.-.--------.---
.. - ----- ..--..-- ---. ._-
103
-------
1-
~ ._---~-- --_. -.--
- - ..
----.-.----..- -----.-...-..--- ._.._--_.
. --:::.':'-= :':.=-.~--_-::--=-:-_'':':'_-':- --_..:- .-::::.....:-.:...:.....:.: ..:.- :'...-_.:: ..:..:.:..=-=-:.-:.:.;:..-=_.-=-=-.:.~-~--= - .:..- ~-':...-".'.,::-" .:".: ~ -..,;.. -"_.:":""':.":'-=--.-=...:'-_- ~
_. -. - - -._.. .--.-.
------_._~~_._--_._~- ----------- ..._----- - '----.
... . - --- --.
------.. '--0. - . - --'--'."----------------___-__n______-----
-----------'-- -
Table 4.18
.Economic Indicators Under
"Mixed Strategy", 1.976
--_._-------
----_._-------_._------------------~-
. --.-. - ----_.. _.__._-:._--.:._.::------.~- -~.~'---- ---=..:.:...- ~--~-:";"'.~--~----_.-:.- ..--. ------. --- ------ -.
------..--
.. Unemploy- Mfg. Prod- Mg. Invest. Reg. Pers. Govt. Rev.
AQCR ment Rate % Change % Change Inc. % Chg. % Change
Steubenville 0.38 - 1. 56 -4. 18 - 1. 28 -1.15
- .-.- .. .
-Sc"ranton- -- - - ---O~- 32-- --,;; 0; 57- ..._-- -..8.66---- -. ---0. 28 --- -- -----0. -5 0------
- .----..- --_._------ -- -----'---------~-_. .._- .---------.------. -...-- ----- ----.- ---- -- .
--- .. - ~h_. ._- .. --
104
_.:::;~" ~. ~
-------
" '. ;:: :: :-:_~:.: :~:..- ::._- - ~"~ -- --=---~--=-..:..=-: :.- ..:......:- -.;...: --=..-.....:..----:..... ~==::::..:u -:::"'::'.:-__"""::- -....:.--=-.--. "-.:_:-:- -. -'-" ::."- -.-- ~::~ :... _.__.-..:..~=:- .:.:.=..-=-
---"-------------F--:----s~u~~i~g- Up - ---------- --------- ..-_n.- ----------
"- ----- "----_.~--~----------------------- -------_._--~-
- _.- -. - - --_.----- .- -- _.
.. -- -.-- ------- _.
The lengthy interpretation of regional economic impacts under
- -.------.------__.___0'- ----.-- --..-----------.-------- --- -.----------..-.---..---.----..--. --_.---
a lte rna ti ve s tr ate gi_e s - can be - summa riz ed as: ---------'--'-'----"--'----'~:' ---"-- - ---- -- _.-."-~_--=--n_---'-'- - ---
The regional economies of different AQCRs respond to
-- - _.._04-0-+'." - .-.-- alternative implementation strategies with considerable
sensitivity as seen from the five variables selected for
analysis, manufacturing production (value- added), manu-
facturing investment, regional personal income, regional
- - - - unemployment ratio, and regional government revenue.
-------~------______For example, increment in unemployment aggregated- - -----_.-----
over the 91 AQCRs varie s from O. 51 percent to O. 18
- percent (see Tables 4.1-4. 4). In the case of individual
AQCR, say Pittsburgh, it varies from 1. 1 percent to
0.3 percent increment depending upon whether two-year
extension for implementation and/or government finan-
cial assistance were available to each AQCR (see Ap-
pendix B and Tables 4.9-4.13).
In general, implementation of the Clean Air Act of
1970 will have greater effect to the manufacturing
industries than income and employment in a given
region.
Cost-sharing by the government is more effective than
a two-year extension to the regional economy. For
instance, the number of AQCRs which will face 0.5 per-
cent or more increment in unemployment rate will drop
from 32 to 20 AQCRs with two-year extensions from
-- --_.-- - -- ----- ---- --------1975 to 1977 while with 59 percent additional government
financial assistance to the control cost the number will
drop to 6 AQCRs, (Table 4. 7). Both aggregate. effect for
91 AQCR s under study (Table 4. 2 and 4. 3) and individual
AQCR data (Appendix B, Strategy 2 and 3) show a con-
sistent pattern of changes for other variables.
105
--.
-- ~ c">
.<...-'- .'--"'.-"
...~,_.,.,-,. ~----- 0-
-------
" ~ - ' .-.~ -.- ""':."" ~"-"''''''''''-'
.' ...:,:",~ ,_...... ,~,--,- -- -.;;, .--:'~~-,=-_.. _-----=-c "=--" _.. ---..--
The geographic patterns of those seriously affected
regions tend to consist with the heavy manufacturing
belt. Moreover, among those highly polluted areas,
those large cities such as Chicago, Pittsburgh, St.
Louis, etc., with existence' of a wide range of other
industries, are able to take the adverse effects com-
pared with small size citie s such as Steubenville,
Youngstown, etc.
This time scheme of implementation also shows that
in the case of a straight implementation by 1975,
most of the impact will be concentrated in 1975.
There are considerable time lags in the ordering.
production, architecture and engineering and delivery
of control equipment to industry, consequently, most
of the impact is likely to be in 1975. With a two-year
extension to 1977, the brunt of the cost is likely to be
borne in 1976. The year of maximal impact is con-
sidered a critical comparative criterion when com-
paring the two implementation periods.
With a detailed analysis of alternative strategy simu-
lation, it is possible to identify AQCRs with five dis-
tinct groups (as shown in Table 4. 7) such that econo-
mic hardship (say, measured by changes of unemploy-
ment rate) should not exceed a given criterion (.5 per-
cent of unemployment rate increment). Such results.
can be achieved with different combinations of time
schemes and percentage of government financial as-
sistance as demonstrated.
106
-------
1__-
-.-.c.-_'--:--.-----'--'----"CHAPTER 5: .APPLICATION TO WATER-POLLUTION-
- -.-.-------------- --- -- u_- -._- AND SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
.-- - -. _.-. ---'------------.----...-....-.-- "--
- - ---
._--- -, - - -- .
This chapter explores the potential for and the- modifications
. - -necessary for the extension of OAP to other media - - water and land
. -~ .. ..-_..-.
- of pollution.
It opens with a discussion of the similarities and differ-
ences among water and solid waste and air quality management.
Next,
it explores the applicability and modifications necessary for such ex-
t -
I -
:-.--------- ----------Iens'ionofthe- OAP Regional Model to the other media in the light of- ..- ------.---
their differences.
Then, it proceeds to a brief review of external con-
ceptual models for assessment of economic effects of water quality and
solid waste management and the data available for ope rationalizing the
conceptual models.
Finally, a few remarks on potential approaches
are presented.
A.
Salient Features of Water Quality
and Solid Waste Management
The need for strategy evaluation regarding control of water pollu-
-. - --. --. -- - ~--~ ------
. _. - --" ...-
tion and solid waste disposal is no less important than for air pollution.
- -- - ----..-.
The modelling approach developed here can be extended to provide esti-
mates of certain effects of pollution control strategies in these areas.
The general modelling approach developed here is conceptually appro-
priate for these evaluations, since the effect of control strategies will
107
---:- '- ;-,...".
-------
-:-,,-,,----,--,--- :_~':-'-'-':'::be' to increase the costs of the various industrial sectors which produce'
.-. _._---
- .---.-..-------.----.----..+ -'-40'- - -+---- --.'--.'._--.-- - ----- .. - -..,.----. - ... ..u .--.--.----...-
- . --- d. ..-- . --
. .
solid wastes and water pollutants.
Estimates of these cost increases
can be used to estimate the effects in ternlS of output and employment
- . ----.".
for the various industrial sectors in various regions.
----_..-- --_._.
--- ---- . ..- - --.The problems of solid waste disposal and water pollution differ
in some important dimensions from the problems of air pollution, and
it would therefore be necessary to modify and extend the model.
The s e
- _. - _. -
I--------------differ'ence s -Include -:------- --.-...---------------- -----------------.
,
I
The com.parative ease of controlling the physical
movement of liquid and solid wastes, thereby
allowing more alternatives in terms of publicly
and/or jointly operated waste disposal systems
. in contrast to gaseous or gas -borne pollutants
which permit effective treatment only at the
source.
The extensive recycling and by-product possibil-
ities which exist for liquid and solid wastes.
The relatively greater importance of the final
consumption and agricultural sectors as genera-
tors of waste products.
.-.------
.._-----~.--_.. .
The requirements for control of waste disposal
----in tidal and estuarine areas. . -- ----------..---------
- - - .. --.
There is more heterogeneity in the types of wastes
to be controlled and fewer interrelationships and
communalities among the various polluta.nts to be
controlled.
108
.'-,-"~-~ ~ -~.-' ~",-~'- --;-'-"""'~'''.~:-
. ,':;..c:.'3-,'.-'
,,- ~-,-,-.., -." "-'-'-"'-
- ,-
-------
I
I .
. . . -
'------_"":':_----C-_----'-.-'C--"-'. This means that the variety of pos sible_control strategie s is much
"---'... -+.
. -_.-. "---.---..---.-- "----.--------...---... -- .__..._---_._.._-~_._+-...__._...:_--- ..-.. -- ._---"- _...._---.------ --..
greater. For example, it would be possible to have' ,one imple~entation
schedule for control of BOD in streams, a different ~chedule for control
_.. . .-- --.+
'of phosphates, and yet a third schedule for control of oil.
--- .---- -..._- -- --- _"0
- - ---.-Past work on economic modelling in pollution control related to
water and solid wastes has been heavily oriented toward direct cost op-
timization models, in which the model's function is to evaluate the
----------'econoriliC' efficiency" alte'rnative control methods. --There has been almost
.- -- ,..----
no work in attempting to identify the total economic effects of alternative
implementation plans on either a regional or national basis.
There is no detailed complete compilation of the costs and benefits
of water and solid waste pollution control.
This lack can be attributed
to at least two distinct causes -- (1) the lack of commonly accepted
standards as the level of control required and (2) the extensive system
interdependencies extant in water-solid waste pollution controls, which
makes the determination of control costs a more complex problem than
- .-. '+.'. - ..
-.-.--.. -------
.inair.
However, costs have been estimated for a nu:nber of regions,
--.. -- ..- .-- -,
watersheds and industries, for specific standards. ':' Data are also avail-
>:, See positions 41, 42, 43, 44, 47, 51, 53, 55, 56, 58, 61, and
73 in Appendix A.
109
._-,c_--~ - ,
"";"'-1"-
'..-"4:;i~;;~~~ .. --
-------
I'~~- ---~~.:_~-;~ :~c~:_.;':.a~l_~..~n. ~aste gene ration for various industrial procc s se s. * The task
.. . . -_. u .. .... .p. -. - -.-- _._.~.__.,..._-- - '---'-~------- .------- ._-_..__.....~-_._._. -_..--_u- -- ---.-.--.., - --. .---.----. + __0-___- .-- _..
..--- ----
---'-6fdeveloping a set oCcomplete costs estimating relationships for regions
as a function of industrial structure,' standards, population, and other
important factors, while a sizeable task, is by no means impossible.
- --. _. -.-...-.
It appears that sufficient data exists to utilize a statistical estimating
approach.
The collection and standardization of the extensive existing
data would involve a considerable effort.
- - ~.. -- .-
'P - -_.
- ...' -. _.' - - - .- ---- -- -
--.-.-.-- -----------------------------.- ------------ ----_._-------------
B.
Required Model Extensions
1.
Public Sector
These differences mean that the potential range of strategies
must include possibilities for public funding and operation of waste
treatment and disposal facilities, with alternative fee arrangements.
It must also include options for more variety in time phasing of differ-
ing standards.
In terms of the model specifics, the control costs as applied to
specific industrial sectors will operate satisfactorily.
However, the
-- --"-'---- ----- ----- ---.-._-
- - - -_. - _.- -
. -- '---. -
- .----. . - - --
- --- ---- - ---.
share of control costs funded by the government must be associated
with the appropriate government unit - - local, state, or national --
>:< (1971) u. S. Environrr::ental Protection Agency, pos. 37,
Appendix A.
110
,;--.--~~:..
- -t'." .,"'
-------
~ -.- -~~.~.~,~~.=---~-~:-.= .:~~s itice thi. ..e fre c t"s-'''wi 11' dfffe.'r "In' 'eacli.-- i Tis"ta ri_c~e"=_lf- ~fh'e".,'g-ove.i~-nme.nt. 'fuiici~- ..-. ~~~:,. ~~-~~"'~~~~~~ ,
---------..----------.-..-'-.... -_.,- . ,.- --- --.-.. . --_...~---_._...n".._- ...--..----..--.,--
ing is in the form of Federal subsidies, the current model will be
appropriate.
If the funding is at the state level, the result will be a
-- -_. --
reduction in disposable income for the state.
If funding come s at the
.., . ~ -- _.. _._- .-
..local level, disposable income in the region will be reduced.
The
:model must be able to represent each of these possibilities or any
combination of them, since strategies involving construction of munic-
---ipal treatment facilities serving a-number of plants and built with both-
------ -.----.
state and Federal assistance are very probable.
This will require
modification of the regional income segment to allow for changes in
disposable income corresponding to the selected strategies.
This same part of the model will also incorporate the effects of
expenditure on municipal waste treatment facilities.
The major eco-
nomic effects will be to reduce disposable income for the governmental
unit.
Another element which must be evaluated is the effect of water
-- - .. ..
---- --
- _.q~alityon industrial pr?duction cos!s. In contrast to air,w.ater ~s an
-------.
- ---. ,- -,..~ .-
essential input into many industrial processes and control of water pol-
lution could result in a cost reduction for some industries, due to a
reduction in the need for extensive pre-treatment.
The evidence avail-
able indicates that the cost reduction obtainable as a result of higher
quality input water is small, but the evidence is inconclusive, and such
direct benefits of pollution control could have major economic effects.
111
. ..-.. .--; ~.;-".~-- ---.. .
~ - '-:"~n'._~'
. ..!:5.
..,.- ~ ~ . ~ ~,------,.~ .-
'.' .C
-'~. .' ..
-------
I ..
r.----'-----"----~--'- --...--- ..-.
.~-_._-----_._._-...._- . ...--- -'--'--.-----.--------'" --'--'._'-----__-.._h- ------_.-.------_.,- ._--_.-,_._-------. ----_.- -- -.------. -...------.. -- .
---,----=-...:..:~ '-...--'-'-'. ~::---.z ; "-.-F 0 od . Pro c e s sing
. - .. --- -. -.. . -- - - - - - . - -' - ...
..- ------------.----.----.- ._-_.-_.._--~._--_._-_.,----, ._.-
- -----------'----'.'-'---._._--_..----_..~-- --_. -.:....- -. ..-.. - --- '. .~-- .-.-
- --- _. -- .- .----. ---..
- .- -_.. .-
Food processing and agriculture have a particularly 'large input
to wate r pollution.
Unlike air pollution, where the contribution of
. _.. ---..---- ... ----- ._---. --'---"
.. .. -". -- . - ------- ". n. - --- -- ..- .-.
- -.. - - -...
food processing and agriculture frequently does not add significantly to
.-. -_. .._--
._---_.--
- pollutant concentrations in urban areas, watershed characteristics some-
times concentrate pollutants, such as chlorinated hydrocarbons and ni-
,
I .
i trogen and bring them to urban areas. It will be necessary to consider
i--'..--~-~--~----the--c'oiitiol .c'os.ts. OragriculturaX'po~luti~n :~nd todete'rmin~ w~ether it is-~-.~---'~ ---.
I " ." .
necessary to explicitly consider agriculture as a sector and to what
extent the costs will be passed on to the food processing sector.
3.
Final Consumption
It will be necessary to determine the control costs associated
with solid waste disposal and to determine the portion of these that
will be borne directly by consumers and the portion that will result
in increased production costs.
The final consumption sector is a major producer of solid wastes,
--- - '-..---- ._.- --- - - ---
the majority of which are the result of indust~i~l- p~ck~ging oper~ti_o.n.s'..-
. -- _.__._-- ---
Pos sible strategie s for control of the se involve requiring industrie s to
modify packaging methods, e. g., requiring returnable bottles or bio-
degradable packages.
Some estimates must be developed relative to
what portion of the costs related to such strate'gies will be passed on
directly as price increases and what portion will be borne by the respec-
112
"."=,".~' + -.'.~" -
----,-...._, -''-,--~
.-..c..''':-'-'' ".-----,0;;',
c .~.~. . ~--"",.[.. ,---. c-._~
-------
~-----
-. ._--.-..
--.-. ...
- --_.-.. _.. -.-- -.
---
.--- --_.._-----~~----_.. ---- ----------- ---.-.'.- .-- --.. .,._~_.._-_.. ---...- ... -----..- -'---.----"--- ---.-.-- -. --. --. -- ----.- .- -
-
---=-,~--=-_:-~',: ---tive-indu'strie"s;':--The:'n-i"odel will als:o have 'to 'incorporate the exfenf'to -,. _u_---,--,--- ..
I-
i
- _._--_._.~.._----'._-- --~.-. --- -. -'--' -~.._. --.--.--0. -.---- - -.- -. - ... --. - '-_.__-4- - - -
---- ...--- -..'
---_.~ _. .- - .- --, ---- -.
which such strategies force structural changes in the industries pro-
:_--,~---,---,- -- ~~cing packaging material. ----
- - -------------.. ----- --,----- -.--.
. ._~- - '-'--
. . - - 4'
----=--- -'---. --~- - -' 4~ ' Tidal .Areas
- - - .. - .
. ------ .-----..--- -- .. - _-4- --- P'
- _-4 .--., . -. ..-
------..- -- -----
---If the model is to include the costs of control in tidal and estuarine
i areas, estimates of the economic effects of the required control will
II - have to be developed. Control in these instances may involve restric-
_._-~._-----_._.._--------_._.. _--__4______--- - --~--_._-_.._---_._-- ------ ..'--- ~--_._--_._---_.- -_.- ------- --- .--------,---.---
~ tions on shipping and docking and the required restrictions would have
to be translated into economic effects on shipping, fishing and other
affected coastal activities.
,- -- -,- 5. - Flexibility
The model must incorporate options to permit differing enforce-
ment strategies for different pollutants.
For example, it may be de':'
sirable to evaluate strategies which will involve control of heavy metals
within one year, industrial organic discharges within two years, and
sewage within three years.
The model presently allows variations in
.., . - -- -------- -
-- .-- 4'
I-
the timing of control costs, but the timing must be the same for all --
- ----- ---- - ---
sectors in a given region.
For water pollution and solid wastes, a
control strategy which varies the timing for specific pollutants implies
that the time pattern of control expenditures must vary by industrial
sector.
113
-------
j-----
- ~- ~_. . __"_.H -.. ,.
i=---=-=-~:~;'::-_~=~:-C ~- _. -E'~-t~nt--I~.1"~-d~"i~'-' ~~d -A~-aiia bi~- .j) a i-a'--'. -:'.~- :_=-,-=c;~-~,c~:;==----.--~'=~~~-==~-'=~~:=-:-'-:~-:---==~--==~~~~
I .
-_._-----_._.- ----..-.------.. -. -----.---- .---------..----.--.---,. --- .- ._-_._----_.__._------~--_._--
~----- ._..__._~_.
A rather extensive survey of recent studies of the economies of
------ -- ----------water pollution control and solid waste management was carried out
1--
. .-... . .. .-
and is summarized in the appendix.
The results of the survey can be
---- ."__4__'----~"- .--.-.-- .
.~ ---- -----
- - -- -- 4'
. -- -- .. --- ._~.
._-- _.- ._-..- - -~ -_.. - --- .
. .. .-- .- ~.._..- -
highlighted as follows:
_.. -. .-- --
Sophisticated analyses of water quality management
tend to limit their scope to a given geographic unit
.-- 'such as a water basin.
'--.------,.-----------------------.- ----------------_._--_.._._------.---
In general, the optimization approach has been more
popular than macro simulation models.
Cost-benefit or cost-effective analyses help in
providing evaluation of the direct costs of al-
ternative planning strategies rather than of the
economy-wide impacts on key economic var-
iables.
However, there are instances of general equilibrium approache's.
For instance, Ayres and Kneese apply a Walras-Cassel general equilib-
rium model with a conceptual integration of material flow from extrac-
tion and agriculture production to material processing to final consump-
---. - -- -.- - ---~
tion, and refus es from production. and consumption will f~now- the flo~- -- ------' - .
of material for recycling. >:'
>:'Ayres, R. U., and Kneese, A. V., "Production, Consumption,
and Externalities, II American Economic Review, Vol. 59, No.3,
June, 1969, pp. 282-297.
114
. "'-''"'-' ,..-:-.~~ "': I
., -.' "'~"'-'"..':,:::R
c."" ~c"--.,----.---".c~~--c-~ ~~~ ~'-
." ..
-------
.. - -.-.
- -.---------.---..--- --- --- -- u_-- -.- -------.--.- --------- ----. -- -- .---.- ---.
--... .--- .--.-- ---- -.--------.-------- --------- -_..-
.--.----.------._u -.-.
1--:
.':"_:_-"--~-:"':"';""::::";'.""; .-'-:.-'-_:"'_:.~'-'=-:-'='.- _:::.:.:..:.:=:..:.:....::-..:..:..=-:........:..:- '-":"'FIG URE - 5. t..-: ..C ..:=:-- :.:.: '---':'''':'':0 -=---:':.---.. --'::.=-..-...~--_._._. ..:.... -'----.-------.-C.
_.~~--_.__.__._- ..:.:- REGIONAL WASTE GENERATION AND EVALUATION MODEL
.-------_.-
.-------..----------,----..-.-.- ._---- ------------
- - -.--.-- .._-.--
.. -- -- -'----'.
.. - --. .
. ~. '--
.. -.-- ---
- - - -.- -. __h_._- -- --..-,-.- -----
- ---.-..-.----- --------.-- -
. .. . - - . - .
- .. - - . . - . - -- - .. --. -- . - -
. - - ..-- -
- - - .
.._- -.-._-_. --. .-------.---...-. ~.'--
-----~
---- -..------ ----
----"------~_"__4___'-_-,,----- .----. - . ---
.-------...----.---
I
Regional Waste Generator Sp~tial Distrib. - - ---
- --"---Econoinic - __OM i--- .- (Cons-.- Sector) ---- ----... of vlastes .--- .- ---------
Model .. l-Iodel Model I
I I Waste Collection
I I r Treatment and
Disposal ~";odel
Interregional Populatio:1 Land Use
Analysis - -
Model Model Nadel
T I
National Process Public Health
Economic Technology - ~-1ode 1
Model Model
I I
---.--.-.
.--.-- ---- - -_._-------------
-- ---- -- - --- ---- .--
-.---..---
- ._------'------'- -----------'--------------.-----'- ---
115
-------
- - -.---- - ~- ---
-~.- - --..-.
- - -_. ~ - -. . ~ -' - --.
.--.- .'-"-' .--.. - -. -~_... --- . .. .--- -- . .
.=-----~=,=-~~=~~=~~::-:~:~~==.Anotlie.r:-_outstandlng"ffiodet""system. "on tb.e"s-otid-.waste management "_. -.-- ---
--.--------"----1;y" G~i~';k~-~~d- Ivi"~G~~hey";:; -~ "q-u~t:~.--~-im-il~; t~ the-~~"r-rent OAP Regional
Economic Model.
The major block flow diagram of Golueke and
. -.---..------.- .------..-.- --- .. --.-- _. .--.
----- .-..-- --- ._---_.- _._- ----..- ----.-. .- -
-.. ....h.
. . . -
- - -..--... ._-
McGauhey is shown in Figure 5. 1.
Other interesting model systems
are b~iE:fly di~c~ssed in the appendix.
-----...---. _.__..+- - ----
...--.- ---
. ----- --- ---~---.-._-- - -
.~.- ~.-----"._....-
The key to ope rationalize conceptual frameworks such as Ayers
and Kneese or Golueke and McGauhey into computer models for strat-
-- -- - -----
_:_---------egy-simulation is the-availability of relevant economic and control data;- ....--------
Since the solid waste management is a major function of local govern-
ment, considerable data are available on the volume of solid waste per
capita.
However, refuse data by industrial categories needs further
inve stigation. **
For water, data of the total water intake and discharge by each
manufacturing industry were published in the Census of Manufacturers
(see Table 5..1); The annual report of Cost of Clean Water also provides
data on estimated BODs by major industry (see Table 5.4), and various
u --.-.. . - -
-.-. --- --- -.-----.. ~._-- ._- -
--. -'- - -
cost estimates are also available as sho~~~~,:!,~!>~~".2~~.'--~ _~arg~
-- ------ ----_u_-.
amount of data is available in a variety of forms.
The bibliography in
Appendix A includes a number of sources of cost data for waste treat-
ment, in the form of engineering data, industry data, and regional data.
This wide variety of data must be synthesized in the forms required for
.. .' -... .,.
~~ Position 58, Appendix A.
. ** See Appendix A, Section E.
116
-------
Cj
t!
~
,
"
,
i
.,
"
J
J
II,
I':
I:
.
'1
"
~
,
"
I ~
"
,
j
:1
I:
!:"i
, 1
I
I;
,
,
'"
:~
I !
t ,
I
SIC
Code
I-'
I-'
-..]
Industry Group
20
21
22
24
25
26
28
29
30
A 11 Industries, Total
Food & Kindred Prod.
Tobacco Mfr.
Textile Mill Products
Lumber & Wood Prod.
Furniture & Fixtures
Paper & A llied Prod.
Chemical & A 11ied Prod.
Petroleum and Coal Prod.
Rubber & Plastic Prod
NEC
Leather & Leather Prod.
Stone, clay & Glass Prod.
Primary Metal Indus.
Fabricated Metal Prod.
Machinery, except elec.
Electrical Equip. &
Supplies : !
Trans. Equipment i I
Instruments & Related
Prod.
Misc. Mfg. Industries
,
I
TABLE 5. , ;' ,
WATER INTAKE BY PU:{ ?OSE, GROSS WA~~ ~:{ !
USED, AND WATER DISCHARGED: 1968 '
,
T ota 1
15466.5
810.9
5.8
154.2
117.9
4.3
2252.0
4476.2
1435. 1
134. 9
15.8
251. 1
5004.7
67.7
189.0
126.6
312.8
37.6
14.4
* (Z) Less than 50 million g~llons
31
32
33
34
35
3'6
37
38
39
(A 11 water data in billions of gallons) !i
Water Intake by
Purpose Steam elec-
of Intake tric power
Process Generation
4295. 1 3008. 7
i
290.6 74; 7
1.7 .2
109.0 5.7
36.5 44.7
1. 8 (Z)~~
1477.9 407.2
733.4 693.8
94.6 169.2
23.8 16.1
13.9
89.1
1207.2
37.1
28.9
. 2
83. 1
1414..8
1.9
70.5
46.6
63.3
9.6
5. 3
16.6
4.6
8. 1
3.3
,
I
!
I
I
i
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
i
I
I
i
i
, I
I ,
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I :
I
I
I
Gros s water
used, including
recirc ulation
or reverse
35700.6
1346.0
:
77.0
'327.5
:
204.9 I
6. 3 I
6521.5 I
941 5. 8 :
7290. 1 I
268.5 I
I
I
!
19.5
412.8
7779. 8 :
168.9 !
338.4 i
369.7 :
910.6 ,
I
,
I
117.9 :
,23.8 :
:' I'
-. - - - - - -----------,---;--. ------,------- --
Iii;
I
I "I
I ! ;
II! ! I .
I I
; i: 'I'
I, , , ,
! t! .
, t.!
! I I!
Total! I'!
, I I
,Water i.1
Discha~ge~ ,
14275.9 ' I
, ,
752.8 j I
4 8 'I: I
. j!
136.0 i'!
I
92. 7 i: i
3. 8 !: I
I 2077. 6 !i
: 4175.6 !:
I
: 1217.0 i
i 128.4 r
I I
I:
! 14. 9 I~
218.4 r
4695. 5 i '
!. ;
65. 0 I: I
180.8 Ii!
"
I:
118.4 i'
I
293.1 !
ji
I:
36 0 I
. I:
13. 0 I;
i
I.
I
I,
I
I.
;1
,
!' ,
! .
i; !
L '
: i
I I
I :
! I
I !
-------
...--.-. ~ .--,-.- ~.~._--._..~-. "" -...---
- - .
. h_"-.- .-. -. -
. ___h__. ----
_._~.._-- ---.- ----..----- -.. _. ---.--...-- - .-.---.-.--.--.----
"-------- .-. ---_. ----_.~----------
~_..._--------_._~.- ----.----- --- -"'''''--'
~ -_.':"~-_':--.:.--~._- ...:-=-~---=--=--::..:..;..-.. -.:--=:_~._-_'::::':~:'=-":::':':"_:'_-:"'=';"";'':_:''':':'''~_':':_~';':''-_----'-':__::':..:.... :.',.', : .- ~ ---.-.::.:-- .-=---"":-"-'_'7-':'---:':'-..:.--.;. :"':"'::=::._'_-':::.':-"':'''::'-:_~'';'''' ---.-------:-.-=--:-.----.---- ,:_.~_. ~
TABLE 5.2
'------.--- .... - " .
INDUSTRIAL WASTE WATER
DISCHA RGE AND ESTI1v1A TED
BODs in 1968
----------"-'-
. ... -..-....
"-----~-- --..-------...-- .
-
1..__._..--- h_- .,-
i
- _.~-_._._----
..- .~ - ','~---.-- -.'1,"
_. _.
SIC
Code
20
22
,2 6---.
28
29
30
33
35
37
. -. '-"-" --. _. --_.- . -- --
..
-
...
~ - ~.~. ~.
- _.. -.- - --.--
, '
Estimated
BODs**
in millions
of pounds
4,600
1,100
-.--7,800
14,200
550
60
550
180
160
470
29,670
------. _.~- _.._- -
-'_-H--- - - --~.- - --
BODs per unit
of waste water>:~>:~*
per pound
1000 gallons
'.
6.11
8.09
----- ,3.,75 - - .- "---.
3.4
. 43
. 47
. 12
1. 00
. 54
...
Total Water*
Discharged
in billions
of gallons
.83
2.08.
* Census of Manufactures, 1967
*>:~ Cost of Clean Water, March 1971, Vol. II Cost Effectiveness
and Clean Water
*~'c* This column is obtained by column 4 divided by column 3
--- -------.-----. _'~h'
Waste Source
Food Processing 752.8
Textile Mill Products ..136.0
Paper & Allied Prod. . .-- ---2p77. 6...- ---.
Chemical & A Hied Prod. 4175.6
Petroleum & Coal 1217.0
Rubber & Plastics 128.4
Primary Metals 4695.5
Machinery 180.8
Transportation Equip. 293.1
A 11 Other
567.0
Manufacturing Total
14275.9
_. ---.- --... - ---
- - -'-'--- - - .---.----.-
- ------ -~-----_. -.---.-
----'--- ---------.--
118
- . - .- .-... ---- -" . - - ' .-.
, - ._- - .- ',,'-.- . ..- - " . .
-------
,j
I '
I '
I
! '
j
I '
I '
I ;
I i
I i
TABLE 5.3 1
I '
COST ESTIMATES OF CLEAN WATER BY
MAJOR MANUFACTURING INDUSTR Y
i. I: I i
Iii i I
i. ~ ~
I !. I t
,: I: i :
I L i ,
! I.: :
: i I I
i I' i '
II'" r. \ i
I: i :
I: I ~ i I
I' I '
"
, I
'.;
I
j
'!
)
, .
i,j
.....
.....
-.0
(millions of 1968 dollars) i: !
SIC INDUSTRY 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973: '
20 Food and Kindred Products 129.3 159. 1 , 172.4 188.6 200.4 212. 0 :
201 Meat Products 22.3 26,5 28.9 30.2 32.0 33.2
202 Dairy Products 20.7 22.2 24.0 24.9 26.0 27. '~'
203 ' Canned and Frozen Foods 24.6 31.3 34.4 36.8 39.4 ,41. 7,
206 Sugar Refining 32.6 41.8 44.2 52.4 54.9 58.8
204,5,7,8,9 A 11 Other 29.1 37.,3 40.9 44.3 48. 1 51. 2
22 Textile Mill Products 44.3 51. 5 55. 7 59.0 62.0 65.9
26 Paper and A llied Products 48.4 55.0 64.8 68.8 72.8 77.0
28 Chemicals and A llied Prod. 77.1 112.,9 130.4 147. 7 166.2 181. Z
29 Petroleum and Coal 75.9 79,;0 85.3 103.8 111.3 118.2
30 Rubber and Plastics, nee c. 8.0 10.0 12.3 12.8 14.2 15. ~, I
33 Primary Metals 167. 7 230.2 247.2 259.0 271.9 283. ~ I
3312 Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills 109.7 147.9 160.7 168.0 177.4 184. 0 i
33ex. 3312 A 11 Other 58.0 82.2 86.5 91. 0, 95. 5 99. 7 I
35 Machine ry 7.5 10.:6 11. 8 13.3 14.6 16. d I
36 Electrical Machinery 6. 5 9.' 1 9.8 10.6 11. 5 12.3: I
37 Transportation Equipment 37.7 43.: 1 45.3 47.7 49.6 51. 9 ,
21,23,24,25 All Other Manufacturing 38.8 53.3 59.4 65.6 72.0 78. ~'I
27,31,32,34, i I
I I
38,39 A 11 Manufactures i I
: , i: I
By Wastewater Profiles ; I',
and Estimates 641.2 813.,7 894.5 976.9 1046.5 1111.8 I
\ ' I
By Census-Municipal ; \
I ' !
Projections 877,.2 1130.;5 1271. 4 1411. 4 1542.3 1665.0 i
I
!
I i
u
'J
,
" I
I'"
I'"
, J
i
j
,
j
,J
~:i
",
i
"I
I'
11
}~~
I
j
~'1
I
. :
, I
, i
I
'j
i
I
I ,
I
I
I
I
I : ~
j' I
! i '
I I
II ~
I
I
,
14~
.~
Source:
The Cost of Clean Water, Vol. ,II, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
U. S. Department of the Interior', January 10, 1968.
-------
. -_u._-.- ----. -
--..-.------. .--.--
- - - --- _.- .
+ - - +- -_.
,--.- --------- _._~-_._--- -----~.._- .- ------'--'.'-- -------.--+-..-----------..---
-------- -----
.--- _n _....-
1-
----'--~.:~- --"--;e'~-on~-rnlc mbde"ifng"~-:-:--Thes-~- data--woui(f-have-i:~- b~-~o'rnpiie-d an-ci ~-ate-~----u_------_.. ----
------_.._-+------ -. ..
.-_. .'.----- -- _.... .-.
..-- +---. -- --
. --- --
logued to determine whether additional data are required.
A pre-
------_..-._---- -
_n__.liminary overview indicates that problem is one of "too much" data--
_C- _d- i.-e., the major-work effo~t will lie in- reconciliation of alternative
- ~-'-'----'_._-'-~'-'----- .-
--lost e-stimate-s -rather than in collection 6f new cost data.
One
. .----..- .-.
element of such reconciliation worthy of mention is the need for
_consistency" in the composition of costs as stated in air and water
1-------- ------_._- ---------------------------------------- ---------- -_. .--.- -- -- --------- ----- ------------"
I control. The latter costs (as outlined in Cost of Clean Water) do not"
I
currently include depreciation in annual operating costs as done in
estimating costs of clean air
D.
Proposed Application of the OAP Economic Model System
With a brief survey of the existing data sources and modeling"
approach in water and solid waste pollution, it indicates:
The macro model simulation approach of the
current OAP Regional Economic Model for the
air pollution study can be extended.to ?~he:~ -------
media.
----.---.-.
-. - --.- -.--
-.- - -- --
-. - --- -----.-.----- - -----------
-._---- ---- -----.
Such an extension would require some sectoral
reformulation, in particular, the government
sector and water use oriented industries.
From the existing data sources, it is feasible
to use the refined model to provide the overall
economic impact of water and solid waste pol-
lution at a macro level. More detailed comments
are possible only after further identification of
data sources of such requirements than has been
possible here.
120
. n'.,..,.- - -, .~. ,...,~ ~
. - _.~~, u
- :.=~:~-o-- ..---- - .-. : '.--:
, W-'--';cO. - ---;
." "
-------
.
'.._~._-,,".:""""".._-'-"-"'-' .---"-~"-~------~'-~-~-;;-:::- -=------'--------....~-.. ':;-.~
., ~_._..>..~-'>;...~'"
._:"-'-'~-,,"-,' ,.'po. .
'-".""."' ."'"
j
I
I
1
Ii
j'
I,
As shown in Figure 5.2, the extension of the model to other
media would imply additions to the existing components of the OAP
Economic Model System.
Four new components are sugge sted,
namely, national economic model; water demand and discharge
model; solid waste generator model and an extended government
sector.
A national economic model is included, in addition to the
current 1-0 model and regional market share matrix, to provide a
dynamic external market scheme to the current cross -sectional
regional model.
The water demand and discharge model can be linked to the
existing manufacturing sector so that total water intake and dis-
charge can be related to the production levels of each industry. In
the case of water, primary and secondary treatment of waste water
are, in general, a public sector effort.
Therefore a tax or charge
must be determined for each industrial userpossibly based on the
amount of discharges and BOD content. Such charges or taxes
would become additional costs to the industries which can be then
treated in a manner similar to the operating costs of air pollution
control in the OAP Economic Model.
The solid waste generator model is similar to the water model
in that physical relations can be determined between economic
-121
-------
. _.._-- -.--- '
--..._~,~~ -- -~.-.L.-o....---
Figure 5.2
PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF THE OAP ECONOMIC MODEL SYSTEM
FOR WATER AND SOLID WASTE POLLUTION CONTROL SIMULATION
,-- --- - ----
I National I
I Economic i
I '
I Model !
I I
I I
I I
- - - - - -,- - - - -,
Manufacturing
Industries
(2-digit SIC)
- - - - - - - - -- - - - - .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --I
:-wa~; ~ema~~ - -: :
I and Discharge I I
- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - --I Model I :
I I
-- I I
- - I I i
1- - - - -,- - - - - I
I I
,- - -----, -"'-------. I
I Extended Gove'rn- I, I
I
: ment Sector . i I
I. Federal ,.
I. State and Local' I
I. Taxation and I I
I ,-~ S b . d' I I
I I ,- - _u_s2:.j.!;.e~ -_..J .
-- -- ,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.J ~ I
-- -- -- ,-' - - - -, - - - - - I
- . I I
-- -- I Soltd Waste I
- -- \ Gene'rator I
-- - I I I
- ~ Model l-
I I
I I
i- - - - -- - - - - - I
-
-
--
--
National
1-0 Model
-
N
N
Regional
Economy
Income and
Consumption
Government
Electricity
and Fuel
Demand
Regional
Market
S ha r e
Matrix
Regional
Labor
Market
D
Existing Components
,- - --j
I I Additional Components
~- - - - I
I,
,
-------
-----....-......-----..........,...........;.
----.._.~~--=-=-."... -'-.-'--' -:.,
,~",:,~.,.,.,....,,\,-
.~~.."~-'~ :"'~;"':::.'£--1:- .ci~-_':;
activities (both production and consumption) and solid waste genera-
tion.. Again, taxes and public expenditures for the treatment of
i
solid wastes can be included in the model as in the case of water.
As new water and solid waste components are added to the model,
the need for an extended government sector as detailed in the next
chapter is obvious.
A more detailed look at the additional components of the model
is provided in Figure 5.3>:'.
What is outlined is only a scheme and
detailed specifications of the model can be undertaken.
The water
demand and discharge model, es sentially, established the relations
between manufacturing productions and waste water discharged.
Detail data available for each industry includes:
Total water intake.
Water treated prior to USe.
Water for process.
Water for air conditioning.
Water for steam electric power generation.
Water for other cooling and condensing.
>:< See CONSAD Research Corporation - op. cit. p.37
4
.123
-------
[-------...- "-~-
Figure 5.3 .
. PROPOSED MODIFICATION FOR THE REGIONAL MODEL
- A MORE DET AILED LOOK~
Current OAP Regional Economic Model
Capital
Stock
Investment
I - - - - - - -- - l)- - --
I
~... Profit
- -- ,
__.1
I I
J
Output
r
I '- - - - - - - - - - -
I
I
::J I
I
I
, I-
I '
I '
~ - - - --I _I
I
I
,
1- -
Employ-
111cnt
Wage
~tcr-
Inination
'-: - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -,
Elect ric Pr ice of
--
Powc r Elcctrici-
Dl:rna nd ty
r~
- *.'~~:~: oil.
t~'1 gas
,,"
-., ~:~~:t;::~)- :: :
tion I I 1
i I ------------- ~I:
G i 'I
o V ern - .J .'" G D v ern -
"
mcnt' Ex- nlent 11_-
pen d i t u res -':1 I He v e n u e :-, -
,- - - - - - - - - - - - J 1-
r
- __I
--------
I
I
I'
Sewage
Charge s to
Industrial
Waste Wate
,
"
.,
.,
Indirect
State & Loca
Taxation &
Char es
I
-------
. .
. -~.-::._~ .-';";"'- .-- --. - - --. -. ::-.
"_."--~--;...-~,
. -" - ---
Water for boiler feed, sanitary services
and other USes.
Total water discharged.
Water discharged into public utility sewer.
Water discharged into tidal water body.
Water discharged into the ground.
Waste water transferred to other users.
Waste water treated before discharged, etc.
Data on BODs and control cost estimates by industry are also
available (Tables 5.2 and 5.3).
Once the relations between industrial productions and water
demand and discharge relations are estimated, control cost - both
investment and operating costs - can be introduced in a manner
similar to air pollution control costs.
In addition, water discharged
into public sewers may lead to sewer charges to industry according
to amounts of BODs to be treated in public facilities.
This position
again becomes an additional cost to the industries.
At the same
time, an increased demand for sewage capacity and primary and
secondary treatment facilities would lead to increased public in-
vestments and in turn to higher taxation at the Federal, State and
local levels.
Therefore, a detailed sectioning of government
sector in the OAP model becomes important as the role of
.
125
-------
,':"';~:,.;~.....~'-:';;;';~),~.,..........-".,. .. -.
government increases.
A possible formulation is given in Chapter 6.
Solid waste control costs are partially in the air pollution
control costs and partially borne by the public sector which costs
could enter the model as additional taxes.
4
126
-------
~.""'~~,,,,,''''~AT.....,;'if'''''~;;'~~'''' -
-:~_...--,._~..
CHAPTER 6: REMARKS AND REC'OMMENDATIONS
Phase I of the effort to utilize the OAP Economic Model was
guided by three objectives.
The fir st objective was to exercise the
mode 1 through the simulation and indepth inte rpretation of the econo-
mic effects of a wide range of implementation strategies.
The second
was to incorporate economic and control cost data more recent than
1967.
The third objective was to utilize the model system to identify
potential areas for model refinement and extension prior to further
applications.
It is to the assessment of the third objective that this
chapter is addressed.
Suggestions for refinement of the model structure naturally be-
gins from an assessment of the performance of the model in the simula-:
tion of strategies.
Consequently, this chapter opens with a brief dis-
cussion of the nature of simulation and its accuracy through a conver-
gency test.
This discussion suggests that the results of convergency
tests, while encouraging, ought to he reinforced by a validation of the
Regional Model.
While the full range of model refinements must await
the validation test, the experience gained in the strategy simulation des-
cribed in this report does suggest a number of refinements which are
described in the rest of the chapter.
127
-------
. ~~-- -- - ~- .---.~--.- - -
-----
--.-.---...-..........-c;;,.
A.
Simulation and Accuracy -
The OAP model was estimated with cross-sectional data for
1967.
The OBE projections by AQCR were used to describe the re-
gional economies of these AQCRs from 1973 through 1977.
Some as-
sumptions underlying these projections and their use in the simulation
warrant comment.
I
I'
I,
Ii
I;
'I
First, the OBE projections must be regarded as a "trend"
projection by each AQCRs.
Consequently, they tend to ignore cyclical
fluctuations of the real economy.
In particular, OBE as sumes a four
percent regional unemployment rate for the years 1973-1977.
How accurate are the estilnates of endogenous variables in the
simulation?
Generally, simulation results are subject to three types
of errors:
error in specification,
error in measurement, and
error in simulation.
Errors of specification arise from a misunderstanding or pur-
poseful simplification in the phenomena being represented in the model;
non-inclusion of relevant variables or improper formulation of func-
tional relationship (e. g., linear instead of a non-linear relationship).
Errors in measurement arise from inaccuracy in assessing a magnitude
such as an economic forecast, and control cost data.
Finally, an
.
128
-------
.:~ ~--'--::"''''~~''''''.:.:''''''.:::-':.:L.:._.._~....-; ===--c;.;;-,-: ~'::'::"'.-;'~::';::"'~~::":'':''''':'''...:..-,-~-- - ~- -:..-:....... .; -- -:':I -' ~~ \, -
error of simulation may result from the process of simulation, e. g. ,
the Newton Method to solve a non-linear system by an iteration proce-
dure~ Again, while a set of equations are solved in a recursive
manner, errors from previous stages of simulation will be cumulatively'
propogated to later stages.
With all types of errors combined in the estimated results obtained
from the model, there is no unique method to distinguish the sources
of error as described above.
This is to say, it is not easy to break
down a given measurement of the error, say Y -9, into the three cate-
gories described above.
Second, the simulation of the OAP regional model is structured
to measure change s due to the control strategy in each year.
These
"changes with control" of each endogenous variable were measured
under the following assumptions.
Suppose
y = a + bx + u
where
y is endogenous variable
x is exogenous variable
a, bare "true" coefficients
* Evans, M. K. and L. R. Klein, The Wharton Econometric Fore-
casting Model, Wharton School of Finance and Commerce, University
of Pennsylvania, 1967, Chapte r IV, pp. 39-43. .
129
-------
u is error term
then the estimated relation will be:
I"- '" /.'
Y = a + bx
(I)
*
If the value of x with "control strategy" becomes x J then the y
*
becomes y .
* '" "" *
y = a + bx
(2 )
And, if we take the difference between (1) and (2) which is, by defini-
tion, the "change with control", we get:
..- "" A
Y = a + bx
-)
* . '" A ~<
Y =. a + b x
..-
dy=
-
b dx
>.'c
where AX = x - X
/'. *
AY = Y - Y
.-
This demonstration shows that the measurements of "changes
with control" are affected only by the accuracy of E. coefficients and
not by the accuracy of a coefficients;
Y
y=;;;:1 +'bx
./
/'
/
/'
/
/'.. /'
Y='a+bx
/'
~
A .....-
--/-"1
/' I
j
YA
/'. I
a
r--
y'
A
x
A
130
-------
.~~,.."...._~..;.;:.:.-.;-_.....:. ~.....:;....:..._.~ . - ~~:"~~-~,,-:""-"p-'
.. --
.- ~'.. ---"':"..,"'.""""""'-
. . ~ ...:; . .
.. -.-..-"--- ..~ .. ..~.
--.' .'. ..:..'--....,' -"",,~'--_C'--
_.
As shown in the preceeding.figure, for a given region A, given XA,
'"
the estimated value will be Y A
rather than Y (which is the true value).
A
('b = b) then the differ-
If the slope of equations is a "true" estimate
-"" /\
ence between Y A and Y A will be a' - a.
In some econometric models,
that are estimated combining cross- sectional and time- series data, it
is customary to introduce a set of "dummy variables" which are no
more than (~1 - ~) for each geographic unit in the model. ':'
Third, the regional model simulation provides not only changes
due to control for each year but also the cumulative value s for the en-
dogenous variables over the implementation period.
The only excep-
tion is unemployment rate, for which annual changes from the OBE
four pe rcent rate are provided.
For all other endogenous variables,
the cumulative effects of control strategies over the implementation
period are produced as illustrated in the cost of regional personal
income in Pittsburgh from 1973 to 1975.
(Fig'ure 6.1)
f.-:-' ~
- ~'< A model of this kind is Crow, Robert T., An Econometric
Model of the Northeast Corridor of the United States, prepared for the
U. S. Department of Transportation, March, 1969. In this model the
entire region has been divided into three subregions, for the estimation
of the model, a set of subregional dummy.variables have been used
which can be viewed as the equivalent of (~I - ~).
131
-------
~ . -. I . -- ...---. --, ._~ ... -. .'" - ., .. . . .... . . -. .. .' . .. - .
. $ Ml illions ... .' .
: ; Figure 6. 1 .'
Projection of Regional Personal Income
11,300 . P'tt b h AQ
\ in 1 s urg CR with and without
.' I control of air pollution. An example
11,200 - year 1973 to 1977.
/)
. ;'/
,I
/yf
.II
.1;
I
/1/
If /
'j
./
If
,.- -.. ._..~- -"-. ..~. .
11, 100
11, 000
10, 900
10,800 .
10,700
10,600
10,500
10,400
10,300
10,200
10,100
10,000
. 9, 900
t
f
f'
(I
. . jI
1
y
, ,
-----
- - - -
-.- . -- . -" - .-.. .
cumulative
\cliange
over time
annual
change
".""'"
..
without control
with control
with control to veal'
(t- 1) before co~trol
on year t
1973
1974
1977
I .
.---..... "'--'-'-'
-
_. " .' .~.
1975
132'
1976
-------
-~~~-,-~ -~ .'-'.---.-.~L.~'-----'--"'.-._-"...=,,-,,'."--' ,". .""0' "-'--'-"-';";';';--';';-=:;;'._~:;;;.;;'--;-~-'----~'"""-----=-~~~~~"-::-.='---ii;;
Personal income Personal income A nnua 1 Cumulative
without control with control c ha ng e c ha ng e
($ million in ($ million in with with control
1967 dollars) 1 967 do lla r s) control ($ million)
($ million)
1973 9942.7 9937.9 4.8 4,8
1974 10273.8 10252.0 - 17.0 - 21. 8
1975 10604.9 10516.7 - 66.4 - .88.2
1976 10996.8 10802.9 - 105. 7 -193. 9
1977 11388.7 11 096. 1 - 98.7 -292.6
However,. preliminary comments about the simulation results
are possible from a convergency test of the simulation program.
The
income determination and labor market blocks of the regional model
were included in this convergency test.
The criterion of the iteration
method used in this test was t~ following:
(v) (v-I)
y. - y.
1 1
-------
Table 6. 1
Compari~on o(Estimated and Actual
Values of Personal Income, 1967
Degree of Under- Degree of Over-
AQCR production by production by
Mode 1 (aJn) Model (%)
New York .3.3
Chicago 11. 1
Los Angeles 3.2
Philadelphia 7.9
Detroit 0.9
San Francisco 10.7
Boston 17.9
Pittsburgh 4.6.
St. Louis 4.5
Washington 34.2.
Cleveland 2.0
Baltimore
Minneapolis 1.4
Hous ton 10.4
Buffalo .33.5
134
-------
For the endogenous variables -- personal income, consumption
and government expenditure s - - in the income block, the fit is Ie s s
adequate; however, the difference s between actual and estimated value s
display on interesting pattern.
The model estimates in the first iteration within five per~ent
of actual value for nine of the 15 AQCRs -- in Appendix D.
For five
AQCRs -- Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Boston and Washing-
ton, D. C. -- the model underestimates the regional personal income
far in excess of five percent of actual value.
It must be noted that
regional personal income data used here pertains to the income of the
residents.
These AQCRs, except for Washington, D. C., are domin-
ant regional metropolitan centers, with large numbers of headquarter
offices and whose residents receive income from other regions.
Washington, D. C., is, of course, the seat of the federal government.
On the other hand, for two AQCRs - - Buffalo and Houston - - are
in the nature of "colonial" centers whose incomes are "diverted" partly
to residents in other regions.
Other examples of this type of AQCR
are Allentown, Youngstown, and Johnstown, which house plants that
are headquartered elsewhere. .
Convergency tests provide only a partial assessment of the model.
A s VanHorn sugge sts, th~ "learning" from a simulation comprise s two
135
-------
stages. ~'< The firs"t stage helps understand the behavior of the simula-
tion itself in terms of the relations between inputs and outputs.
The
second and, often, the more difficult stage," is to translate the I'learn-
ing" from the simulation to "learning" about the actual proces s - - func-
tioning of the economy.
A validation test is an example of the second
type of learning and is appropriate as the springboard for future refine-
ment of the OAP regional economic model.
The experience gained in the simulation of strategies in Phase 1,
however, suggests a number of refinements in the model to be more
responsive to the emerging needs of EPA.
These are presented in order
next.
B.
Policy Simulation and
Government Sector
One of the most important dimensions of an implementation strategy
specification is the cost sharing scheme between the government and
industries.
The simulations in Phase I used 59 percent of government
as sistance under the as sumption that this kind of assistance is the
result of a combination of cost sharing provisions such as accelerated
* Richard L. VanHorn, "Validation of Simulation Re sults ",
ManagementSdence, Vol. 17, No.5, January, 1971, page 247.
136
-------
depreciation, investment tax credits, tax exemptions, government
loans and loan guarantees and direct aid in the form of grants and
technical as sistance.
It would be definitely desirable to introduce each
of these cost sharing provisions separately in the model instead of
inputing this overall level of as sistance.
Such a capability can be built into the model if the federal, state
and local government sectors are recognized in the model.
Currently,
only the local government sector has been included in the model.
Given the re sult that the regional economy is quite sensitive to the cost
sharing scheme in any given strategy, further refinement of the public
sector of the current model is warranted.
Klein has suggested that in an "ideal" regional model, the
following government sector equations should be included. ~:'
SL
(1) Tpi = f 1 (Wi L i 71" i)
SL
(2) T =f2(flXi)
Xi
F
(3) T = f 3 (W. L . 71" i)
i 1 1
(4) T~ =f4(UiNi)
1
(5) SL SL r)
G. = f 5 (Ti ' N i '
1
SL SL SL
(6) T = Tpi + TXi
i
direct regional taxation
(state and local)
indirect regional taxation
Federal taxation
regional transfer payment
Regional government expenditure
total regional taxation
*Klein, Lawrence R., "The Specification of Regional Econo-
metric Models", Papers, the Regional Science Association, Vol. 23,
1969, pp. 105-115.
137
-------
where: SL
T. = state and local direct taxes
1
W. = wage rate
1
L. = employment
1
= non-wage factor income
71".
1
SL
T = state and local indirect taxes
Xi
SL
T = state and local direct. taxes
Pi
P. = GRP (gross regional product) deflater.
1
X = gross regional product
i
F
T. = taxes paid to federal government
1
R
T = transfer payment
i
U. = regional unemployment
1
N. = population
1
SL
G. = state and local expenditures
1
SL state and local receipts
T =
i
r = interest rate
138
-------
This specification of the public sector needs to be augmented by
additional equations appropriate for air .pollution control strategies.
For example, property taxe s can be separated from equation (1) so
that when the regional estimate of property values are available before
and after control, the reliability of estimates of benefits in the region-
al model can be improved.
Second, indirect taxes in equ~tion (2) can be used to alter dif-
ferent cost sharing schemes and economic incentive schemes in air
pollution control in conjunction with profit and inve stment equations of
the manufacturing sector.
C.
Investment Function
Besides the government sector, another sensitive variable in the
model is the investment behavior of the high emission industries.
In
Chapter 4, investments for manufacturing production appeared to be
the most sensitive variable under the alternative implementation
strategie s.
A s more detail is provided to introduce cost sharing and
economic incentive schemes during model refinement, improvement of
the profit and investment equations will be necessary.
In the current
model, the investment equations were estimated with cross-sectional
data for 1967.
A ny improvement of the inve stment equations must
139
-------
include some analysis of overtime investment behavior, often described
as "lag distribution" of the investment behavior.
An example of such
an analysis is provided by Shirley Almon. ):<' Almon's empirical study
shows different patterns of investment among different manufacturing
industries.
It may be, therefore, desirable to estimate investment
functions by industry based on time series data in order to account
for the time lags of the business investment phenomena.
D.
Treatment of Benefits
The level of benefits of air pollution control is current as sumed
at $10 billion or $15 billion over the implementation period.
T hi s is
no more than a rough estimate of net benefits based on a list of inde-
pendent studies on health,expenditure, damage to buildings, property
values, agriculture, etc.
Further, the induction of this benefit into the
model leaves something to be desired.
It has been argued that the re-
gions with a higher level of emissions before control will experience a
considerably greater benefit after control.
Thus, the increases of pro-
perty values in Pittsburgh, for example, would be higher under a given
control strategy than in San Francisco.
The way benefits are fed into
th~ model currently, such variations are not likely to be reflected.
* Almon, Shirley, "The Distributed Lag Between Capital Appro-
priations and Expenditures, II Econometrica, January, 1965, pp. 178-186.
140
-------
Source:
20
An manufacturing
20
Other durable goods
An durable goods
20
An nondurable goods
o
20
Food and beverages
Textile mill products
Paper and allied produc.s
Petroleum and coal
products
Other nondurable goods
B est Distributed Lags for Manufacturing lndustrie s
10
o
Primary nonferrous
metals
10
o
be
.5
~
I:
8. 10
'"
...
o
~
Electrical machinery
Fabricated metal
products
6 7 8 9
Reprinted from Shirley Almon's "The Distributed
Between Capital Appropriate s and Expenditure s",
Econometrica, January 1965.
141
Lag
-------
Third, instead of using total estimate of benefits, it may be
more desirable to treat more specifically itemized benefit categories.
Examples of such categories are regional property values, increase
in labor productivity in terms of reduction of number of sick days due
to the air pollution, increased demands for control devices and man-
power requireInent, etc.
With more reliable data on each specific
benefit category, the reliability of simulation output will be improved.
Alternatively, specific parameters of the model may be judgmentally
modified to reflect these changes.
.142
-------
APPENDIX A
A SELECTIVE SUR VEY OF RECENT
STUDIES OF THE ECONOMICS OF
WATER QUALITY AND SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT
-------
I.
II.
. ------_. -, _.--~....,~... ~
T ABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
1
BIBliOGRAPHY
2
A. Standards and Criteria for
Water Pollution Control 3
B. Sources and Types of Pollutants
and Methods of Treatment 4
C. Econornics of Water Resource
Development and Management 8
D. Economics of Industrial Water Management
and Pollution Control 19
E. Economics and Management
of Solid Wastes 23
F. Legislation and Administration 31
G. Bibliographies and Reference Tools 33
H. Tables on Major Water Polluting Industries and
Major Waste Categories 37
ii
-------
1.
INTRODUCTION
A state-of-the-art survey of the literature relevant to the eco-
nomics of water pollution and solid waste management was initiated as
a first step in the assessment of feasibility of applying the current eco-
nomic model system to water pollution control and solid waste manage-
ment.
This annotated bibliography was restricted to the most recent
literature, apart from the classical references on environmental man-
agement.
Key words to characterize the selective literature survey pro-
vided in this working paper are:
Economics of waste management,
Costs of control,
Key pollutant types by industrial
clas sification, and
Leg is lation and adminis tration.
This bibliography was prepared by Teresa Romanowska-
Lakshmanan, Library Consultant.
A. I
-------
1---- ..-_..__._-~~-,===~~.~.'~~.~~~.~~.'~'~'.~~
II.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A. 2
-------
w - ~"'- ". ' ---" .
.--' -"-."" .
: ----::'~'...~..-:-,", '... ..'-';' ~ _.~~- . ......' . -
-- --.-.--. .--'.~':""'~ -:.:.-.. ::....-
- - .-.__..~'- -.-,. --' "'-.
A.
ST ANDARDS AND CRITERIA FOR
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
1.
National Association of Manufacturers. Water in Industry: A Sur-
vey of Water Use in Industry. New York, 1965.
Survey by type of industry, tables and data on industry
water requirements.
2.
Santaniello, R. M. "Water Quality Criteria and Standards for In-
dustrial Pollution Control Effluents. II Industr ial Pollution Con-
trol Handbook. Edited by H. F.- Lund. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1971, Chp. 4, pt. 2, pp. 4-23 -- 4 -40.
The water phys ical and chemical pollutants are lis ted with
the concise definition of each, the source and polluting effects,
and required standards (or maximum permissible quantity
present) of pollution control are given. Standards are designed
to meet pollution control requirements of 1971.
3.
U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. Water
Quality Criteria. Report of the National Technical Advisory
Committee to the Secretary of the Interior. Washington, D. C. :
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1968, x, 234 p. ("literature
cited" after each chapter).
Water pollution control standards for recreation and
aesthetics, public water supplies, fish, other aquatic life and
wildlife, agricultural uses, and industry (seven most polluting
industries represented: (1) steam generation and cooling,
(2) textile, lumber, paper, (3) chemical and allied products,
(4) petroleum and coal, (5) primary metal industry, (6) food
and kindred products, and (7) cement industry).
A.3
-------
r'.-~::'~"'-"':" -
_.'~"'..-""~":..\'...,-'......~'~.r.~.'i,-"""~",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,""'i~~.~
B.
SOURCES AND TYPES OF POLLUTANTS
AND METHODS OF TREATMENT
4.
Besselieve, E. B. The Treatment of Industrial Wastes. New York:
McGraw -Hill, 1969.
This is one of the first comprehensive textbooks on the sub-
ject, with emphasis on cost analysis and modern management.
A comprehensive coverage of the methods of waste water treat-
ment given in chapter eight. The author has been a consultant
on water pollution pro blems for many years. The textbook
written for engineers but may be used by a non-technical reader.
5.
Clark, J. W.; Viessman, Jr., W.; and Hammer, M. J. Water
Supply and Pollution Control. 2nd ed. Scranton, Pennsylvania:
International Textbook Company, 1971, 661 p. (bibliography in-
cluded after each chapter).
Comprehensive coverage of problems of water supplies,
requirements, and waste quantitie s. The s ys tems for treating
water and wastes and treatment processes are discussed in de-
tail. Numerous mathematical formulae, tables, diagrams, and
flow charts are given. Altho\lgh meant for engineering students,
may be used as a reference by a layman.
6.
Culp, R. L.; and Culp, G. L. Advanced Waste Water Treatment.
Cincinnati, Ohio: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1971,
317 p.
This book describes the work on pollution abatement in
Lake Tahoe, California. A concise description of character-
istics of secondary effluents: organio, inorganic, particulates,
viruses, is given. Several modern methods of secondary waste
water treatments used at the Lake Tahoe Project are dis cus sed.
Emphasis is put on costs and effi~iency of the methods. A long
list of references, many tables, diagrams and statistics make
this book an excellent reference tool, even for a layman.
7.
Eckenfelder, W. W. Industrial Water Pollution Control. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1966, 275 p. (includes bibliographies):
A textbook on waste water treatment. Description of
methods, many mathematical formulae and diagrams are given.
A typical textbook for engineers. A summary of IISource and
Characteristics of Industrial Wastes'l is given in the first chap-
ter.
,
A.4
-------
L-""::-'-~:""~-';""~~' -_...: ~~>'-.:.,>.:-:.. .
. '~ '..
"-..~.,;;~~ -;""',..;.i'<'~-'::~-~j'~"""«-'!"~"UfG,~\IJI~Io'I"U''''''~'-''''QIrI
._..~~''''_. ..,.-'
'-~~~~,*-~_._-
8.
Grava, S. Urban Planning Aspects of Water Pollution Cont.rol. .
. New York: Columbia University Press, 1969, 223 p. (anno-
tated bibliography, pp. 188-209).
A comprehensive coverage of the planning aspects of water
pollution in the cities (a watershed management model, techno-
logical aspects of sewage, administrative and regulatory aspects,
financial situation and local planning agencies) is given. Chap-
ter three contains a description of "Source and Types of Pollu-
tants, " with some statistical data. This textbook constitutes
one of the first efforts to present the pollution problem from the
urban planning point of view. Reading may be useful to an in-
terested layman.
9.
Gurnham, C. F., ed. Industrial Waste Water Control: A Textbook
and Reference Work. New York: Academic Press, 1965,
476 p.
A basic textbook on methods of waste water and solid wastes
treatment in various industries (organic and inorganic). No
mathematical formulae.
10.
IIIndustrial Wastes Profile, No. 1-10.1/ Vol. 3, pt. 1-10 of U. S.
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. The Cost of
Clean Water. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing
Office, January 10, 1968, 4 v.
This volume constitutes a detailed survey of the ten most
polluting industries. The costs of the processes of waste re-
duction or removal from the polluted water are given. The
summary tables, flow charts and diagrams are included.
11.
"Inorganic Chemical Industry Product Profile s. II Vol. 3, pt. 1-10,
of U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. The
Economics of Clean Water. Wasb,ingtoll, D. C.: U. S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1970, 4 v.
The appendix contains the survey of individual product pro-
files of inorganic chemical industry with data on 1969 and 1974
production tons /year, uses, proces s, and waste problem.
Compiled from various available published sources. Process
flow charts and summary cost pollution control tables are in-
cluded.
- .
A.5
-------
!_-~
..L_-~---'--'- A.
. . ~.~ . --- .
,.:;'~;;'...' '.;..'; ..-.~:
--
'_.'~'~~~~"~~~'~""':''''~''r..-\C .II"M-6[
12.
"Inorganic Chemicals Industry Profile. II Vol. 3, xvii, 467 p. of
U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. The
Economics of Clean Water. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1970, 4 v;
The description of the inorganic chemical industries (pro-
duct, technology, process, waster water treatment) and the
costs that the industry would incur in attaining various levels
of pollution abatement Over the five - year period through 1974
are given. A description of manpower requirements for the
operation and maintenance of foregoing waste treatment facil-
ities is provided. The corresponding cost estimates are based
on publis hed data from Manufacturing Chemis ts Association.
The. summary tables and process flow charts are included. The
detailed survey of the various industr ies is included in the
Appendix C, pp. 178-244.
13.
Klein, L. River Pollution. Ill: Control. London: Butterworths,
1966, 484 p. (list of references included).
A comprehensive coverage of pollution problems in the
rivers: detection, measurement and abatement. Methods of
sewage dis posal and pur ification, and dis posal and treatment
of industrial waste water are discussed in detail. Many tables,
diagrams, statistics and bibliographical references are given.
This is a textbook for students in Great Britain. The water
quality standards for rivers, sewage effluents and industrial
waste water in the British content are given. Very'useful for
comparison of the situations in Great Britain and the United
States.
14.
Lund, H. F., ed. Industrial Pollution Control Handbook. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1971, Iv. various paging.
Very comprehensive coverag~ of all aspects of the indus-
trial pollution control. Designed to provide guidance in what
should be done and how it can be done to eliminate pollution and
prevent further pollution. History of Federal and state pollu-
tion control, pollution control by industry (every major indus-
try where pollution is a major problem) have been described.
Operating costs and procedures of industry pollution control
engineering and pollution control equipment are discus sed in
detail. All throughout the book the emphasis is given to cos t,
efficiency of performance to attain new standard requirements,
and up-to-date technology is given. May be used by interested
layman.
A.6
-------
I.~__- -_. -
- -' ..~:.. "
---:-:.- ',' .~...-~.....::..--._. --.....:..
. .-- ---"- .-1- ..~~~-"";~'_:,,-.~-~.c.:;.;.~....;..------~---=.=,--~-
15.
"Pollution Control by Industry Problem." Industrial Pollution Con-
. tro1 Handbook. Edited by H. F. Lund. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1971, Sections 2 and 3 (Chapters 10-26).
Air and water pollution control methods and equipment in
ten major pollution industries are described. Emphasis on cost
and efficiency of system operation. Up-to-date processes and
equipment. The pollution control systems in European indus-
tries are included.
16.
Ross, R. D. 'IPollution Waste Control. " Industrial Pollution Con-
trol Handbook. Edited by H. F. Lund. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1971, Chapter 7. .
Description of sources, methods (engineering), and equip-
ment of waste control. Up-to -date proces ses and equipment
applied in disposal of gaseous wastes, liquid wastes and solid
wastes are described in detail. The emphasis is on the effi-
ciency of the treatment processes and cost estimates.
17.
Sitting, M. Water Pollution Control and Solid Waste Disposal.
(Chemical Process Review, No. 32). Park Ridge, New Jersey:
Noyes Development Corporation, 1969, 244 p.
A short discussion of the problem of population growth and
increase of solid waste and water pollution. The types of water
pollutants from major polluting sourceS (watercraft, oil indus-
try, chemical industry, etc.) and the processes of their re-
moval are discussed in detail. Description of the processes
are concise and based on up-to-date patented materials and
methods. Numerous diagrams, photographs of the equipment
and process flow charts are included. Good background reading
on pollution sourceS and processes fo'!' a technician and a lay-
man alike.
18.
\
Tebbutt, T. H. Y. Principles of Water Quality Control. Oxford:
Paragon Press, 1971, 179 p.
Concise textbook on characteristics of waters and waste
waters, and treatments of waste water. Numerous tables and
diagrams. Intended as an introductory textbook.
A. 7
-------
- >' '.. ., . ", .
_.";"_~l_......._-.iu';;:"':- ........u.",-_. -"._~-,._-,"""''''.---_..... -. . -
,~. .......--- .....~-~._,----"-.~~O;;~-~'=-"'=;-~==-....o.""---='"=~-~'''=-'-''--'~---~
C.
ECONOMICS OF WATER RESOURCE
DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT
19.
Bramhall, D. F.; and Mills, E. S. "Alternative Methocls of Im-
proving Stream Quality: An Economic and Policy Analysis. 11
Water Resources Research, Vol. 2. (3rd Quarter), 1966.
pp. 355-363.
There are no market or other institutional mechanisms to
register the benefits-and-costs of stream qualities. It is nec-
essary to study economics of the design, as well as public pol-
icies, in treatment of stream qualities. There are two methods
analyzed: (1) waste treatment, and (2.) augmentation of low
flow. Estimates of both methods are given for a stream in
Maryland State, applicable to all humid eastern United States.
Conclusions are: (1) low flow augmentation is ales s eco-
nomical method than 90% waste removal by secondary treatment
at the point of waste generation, and (2.) a combination of efflu-
ent fees and enforcement is judged desirable.
The mathematical formula for determination of optimum
process (model) is given, and public policies for improving
water quality are evalu'ated. Includes m.athematical formulae,
diagrams and tables.
2.0.
Cleary, E. J. The ORSANCO Story: Water Quality Management
in the Ohio Valley Under an Interstate Compact. Baltimore:
The Johns Hopkins Press, 1967, 335 p.
In this book, the experience of the Ohio River Valley Water
Sanitary Commission is recorded and appraised by its executive
director and chief engineer since its establishment in 1948.
ORSANCO is a unique institution for water quality management
with a remarkable record of acco.mplishment in combating water
pollution through a large river valley and over the state's bound-
aries. Its story shows day-to-day problems in planning and en-
forcing the water pollution control. The political aspects, as
well as technical aspects, are discussed.
2.1.
Davis, R. K. The Range of Choice in Water Management: A Study
of Dissolved Oxygen in the Potomac Estuary. With the contribu-
tions by R. M. Steinberg, L. J. Hetling, and N. C. Matalas.
Baltimore: published for Resources for the Future by the Johns
Hopkins Pres s, 1968, 196 p. (bibliographical footnotes).
A.8
-------
~
-",',' ''''.1:. "'::"':,- ,':'"'''"':~''l~~\;l.!~i-i;;-;?;',,,~'~~:'~'~~''' ;a:L~......
_..---...A~-"'-"'o '.-~-- -_. -oJ- - - .--.--. _.... -
22.
The study is an application of economic analysis to the
water resources planning process. Benefit-cost analysis is
used in defining water quality level, developing system com-
ponents and choice of alternatives in water quality management.
Mathematical models are presented in detail. The political
process in water management is discussed.
Goodman, A. S.; and Dobbins, W. E. "Mathematical Model for
Water Pollution Control Studies." American Society of Civil
Engineers, Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division,
Vol. 92, No. SA6, 1966, pp. 1-19.
. The article discusses a methodology (model) for analysis
of the physical, economic and administrative relationships in
water pollution control. The n'lodel is devised for a river and
tributaries. The water from the river is used as municipal
water supply, disposal of treated sewage,and recreation by the
population and industries along the river. The. equations and
procedures of pollution control are discussed in detail. The
model may be applied in engineering and planning studies of
pollution control. Numerous tables and diagrams are given.
Very clear presentation may be useful to a layman interes ted
in the problem..
23.
Hammond, R. J. Benefit-Cost Analysis and Water-Pollution Con-
trol. Stanford: Stanford Food Research Institute, Stanford
University, 1960, 95 p. (bibliography, pp. 81-88).
The book consists of a descriptive cost-benefit analysis of
water pollution. It is the first summary of application of this
method to water pollution control problem. No mathematical
model given. Historical background of cost-benefit method
application by Corps of Engineers to water reclamation proj-
ects, etc.; critic of late 1950's approach to cost-benefit is
given. Very good analys is of water pollution problem, the pol-
lution abatement and application of cost-benefit. Understand-
able to an educated layman.
24.
Harvard Water Program, Harvard University. The Economics of
Water Supply and Quality. For the Water Quality Office, Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency. (Water Pollution Research
Series 116 110 DTF 02/71). Washington, D.C.: February,
1971, 71 p.
The introduction is given in Section 1.
A.9
-------
,~ .'--:'~""'::-""':"';.:-- ':. ''':'~:.J'',.....:, .;.;:..aUt"'<"""'~-:.~::ii';.4'.Fv');"'''''\'''.\,,....... -
,
[
[ ,
Section II of the report discus ses: the economics of clean
water supply, drought and water supply shortage in municipal
system planning, and includes a mathematical model for clean
water system planning. Economics of water quality manage-
ment for a river basin and a mathematical model are also dis-
cus sed. The pollution problem is analyzed in municipal waste
management problem with a discussion of cost-sharing schemes,
and a model of municipal decision proces s. An estuary water
quality management is given as a sample application of the
model.
Section III consists of a m.onograph on water quality man-
agement. Reading requires some background in economics.
25.
Hufschmidt, M.; and Fiering, M. B. Simulation Techniques for
Design of Water Resource Systems. Cambridge: Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1966.
Presentation of the simulation of a water resource system:
(1) system definition, (2) data analysis, (3) system variables,
(4) operating procedure, (5) cost and benefit functions, and
(6) summary of economic analysis. This is a highly technical
work, most of the book consists of the detailed analysis of the
simulation program and its subroutines, \-vith a chapter on
lessons and future prospects of applications. Requires back-
ground in economics.
26.
Karrer, D. A Systems Approach to the Establishment of a Basin
Organization for Water Quality Management. Unpublished
thesis, University of Pittsburgh, 1969.
Detailed analysis of the hypothetical, most efficient organ-
ization of a River Basin Commission,- its authority and methods
applied in pollution control. Hypothetical model for BOD con-
tent for effluent standards to estimate cost of waste treatment
.
is included (pp. 79-83).
27.
Kneese, A. V. The Economics of Regional Water Quality Manage-
ment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press for Resources for
the Future, 1964, 214 p. (bibliographical footnotes).
28.
Kneese, A. V.; and Bower, B. T. Managing Water Quality: Eco-
nomics, Technology, Institutions. Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins Pres s for Resources for the Future, 1968, 328 p.
(bibliographical footnotes).
A.10
-------
...._--.* '---.
-" I'~.:....'::;-:';'. ;'''''~;::''.:.':~;~~- -- - ,;'...
:"........~;~--'B~-..~,,;..l~'";":~~:-ia~~---...-
-- * ...;.;~ .,"-.~
This book is a substantial revision and extension of the
1964 edition. It presents the water management problem and
the pollution control problem in an exhaustive, but clear fashion.
The nature of the water quality problem.is derived from
three issues: What levels of quality?, How can a given level
be achieved at least cost?, and What institutional and organiza-
tional arrangements are needed?
Water pollution is examined from the standpoint of type of
pollutants, uses of water, managing of wastes. The economic
concepts and policies for controlling pollution are analyzed for
indi vidual and regional s ys terns.
The book is written very clearly and may be understood
by a non-economist.
29.
Maas, A., et al. Design of Water-Resource Systems: New Tech-
niques for Relating Economic Obiectives, Engineering Analysis,
and Governmental Planning. By A. Mass, M. M. Hufschmidt,
R. Dorfman, H. A. Thomas, Jr., S. A. Marglin, and G. M.
Fair. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962, 620 p.
(bibliographical footnotes).
The book reports the results of a large-scale program de-
voted to the methodology of planning or designing complex, mul-
tiunit, multipurpose water resource systems. It is a detailed
presentation of basic economic concepts of a system design
(production function, net benefit function and optimality condi-
tions), and the economic factors affecting the system (budgetary
constraints, dynamics of water resource development). The.
model is presented in graphic and mathematical form. Conven-
tional and new economic methods and techniques (simulation,
mathematical model) are described. -Also the governmental
factors, i. e., influence of political process on system design
is analyzed. Rather technical.
30.
McJunkin, F. E. "Economics of Water Quality Management. "
Proceedings of the Fifteenth Southern Water Resources and
Pollution Control Conference Sponsored by Duke University,
North Carolina State University, and University of North
Carolina. Held at North Carolina University, Raleigh, North
Carolina, April 6 -8, 1966, pp. 34-43 (list of references in-
cluded). .
A.11
-------
I .-
---------
.'.';.... .~'-.. '!"-''''!"...,.~'.;.'L;~...l "-:-;:~~:iM&~'If.1~..,:~~:?
. This article presents a review of current (1960.s) situation
of public water policy, lithe water resources of the State shall
be prudently utilized in the best interest of the public. 11 In the
free market economy, such a policy allowed pollution to grow.
Thus, the system approach to economic efficiency of pollution
control or water quality management is discussed as one of the
methods. The effluent charges, low flow augmentation are dis-
cussed as techniques that can be applied within the system.
Review of the trends in Federal policy for the future is
also given.
31.
Pillsbury, A. F., ed. Proceedings of the Water Pricing Policy
Conference, University of California, Los Angeles, 1968.
(University of California Water Resources Center, Report No.
13). Los Angeles: Water Resources Center, University of
California, 1968, 109 p.
Discussion of several aspects of price of clean water use:
role of planning in pricing water, economist role, and IIproduc-
tion" of water, social constraints on water policy, and con-
sumer. s viewpoint and policy decis ions.
32.
Timmons, J. F. IIEconomics of Water Quality. II Water Pollution,
Control and Abatement. Edited by T. L. Willrich and N. W.
Hines. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1967, 194 p.
(bibliographical references, pp. 33 - 50).
This article presents a general dis cus sion on economics of
water quality: (1) identifying levels of water quality, (2) the
technological means for achieving particular water quality, i. e. ,
cleaning of polluted waters, (3) criteria, (4) cost and benefits,
and (5) structure of law and administrative procedures.
33.
U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. The Cost
.
of Clean Water: Economic Impact on Affected Units of Govern-
ment. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office,
1968, 227 p.
This study presents and evaluates all available data on
water-borne waste sources, treatment technology, control de-
ficiency, and the requirements of state and local governments
to achieve the desired water quality standards for beneficial
uses. The study relates the requirements for sewage treat-
ment plant cons truction in pe rs pective to other competing proj-
A.12
-------
.......~...........,,-_._-'-
~ ..;..,~-~-.-;
, '
I
,
~,,,,.'..'.,~.'- ,.~ """""'-'''~''"'''''--'- ,,'~"._-_u_-~..-
ects confronting the affected units of government, and it ap-
praises the major financial and legal problems which will be
encountered in implementing the Water Quality Standards
(Preface).
The requirements, capital outlays, financial ability of
states, legal constraints on states and local governments in
financing the require capital outlays are discussed. (Detailed
tables included in Appendix IV, pp. 202-226.)
34.
(1968) U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. The
Cost of Clean Water. Washington, D. C. : U. S. Government
Printhg Office, January 10, 1968, 4 v.
Vol. 1: Summary Report, 39 p. ("references cited, II p. 39).
This report presents summary and conclusions on initial
estimates of the National requirements for and the costs of
treating municipal, industrial and other effluents during the
FY 1969 -1973 to meet water quality standards established
under the Water Pollution Act (1965, 1966).
Some of the findings are: (1) the cost of constructing waste
treatment plants and interceptor Sewers is estimated at $8 bil-
lion, (2) by 1973, the urban population required the sewer facil-
ities will comprise circa 75% of the population of the country,
(3) the significant cost reduction may be achieved through estab-
lishment of the intermunicipal sewage treatment and disposal
system and districts, (4) better in-plant controls and process
changes, and joint municipal and industrial treatment will im-
prove efficiency of waste abatement, (5) operating costs will
increase and continue to rise, and (6) constructing costs will
require new capital outlays (charges,' bonds, etc.).
Vol. 2: Detailed Analvses, in thr,ee parts, varioug paging.
Vol. 2, part I: Municipal Requirements and Cost Estimates,
xv, 47 p. (bibliography, pp. 44-47).
The requirement for, and the costs of, treating municipal
waste effluents to attain water quality standards during the F Y
1969-1973 by state and water region are discussed.
The cost estimates include the requirements and costs of
controlling water pollution from unsewered urban population
and from combined sewer overflows since these, too, are re-
lated to the total problem. The costs are considerable. Sum-
mary tables included.
A.13
-------
.,.-'-' .-..;.h' -,_:"" ......--..-
35.
~. . ~ -- . '.~< '~. .-'1...";' ...u'. -....~:"....;'.~",-..-.~ -"'-'-"~-"'-'.'''''-.''------. -------.- ..
Vol. 2, part II: Industrial Requirements and Cost Estimates,
pp. 51-163 (bibliography, pp. 153-163).
The volume of industrial wastes and then costs of methods
of industrial waste control, unit costs, and cost of regional
facilities are analyzed. Summary tables included.
Vol. 2, part III: Other Effluent Requirements and Cost Esti-
mates, pp. 167-244 (bibliography, pp. 242 -244).
Costs of control of wastes from watercraft, radioactive
industrial wastes, erosion and sedimentation, acid mine drain-
age, feedlot pollution, pesticides, lake salinity, oil pollution
are analyzed and estimates given. Summary tables included.
Vol. 3: Industrial Waste Profiles, No. 1-10, in ten parts,
various paging.
The wastes produced by ten most polluting industries are
dis cus sed along the following lines: projected waste loads (in
tons and dollars), the replacement values for the existing treat".
ment facilities, as well as anticipated costs for future treat-
ment practices in terms of capital and operating costs. Each
industry has been surveyed in detail; the waste water sources
are discussed, as well as treatment methods, and processes
of production. Flow charts, diagrams and numerous tables
are included.
Vol. 4: State Maior River Basin Municipal Tables, v, 44 p.
Costs of standards attainment by 1973, adequate waste
treatment, urban population used as measure of industri~l
maintenance and sanitary costs are discussed. Summary
tables given (in 1968 dollars).
(1969) U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. The
Cost of Clean Water and Its Economic Impact. Washington,
D. C. : U. S. Government Printing Office, 1969, 4 v.
Vol. 1: The Report, xiv, 220 p.
This report updates the 1968 analysis of costs. The pro-
gress and needs of waste treatment facilities investment are
analyzed. The conclusion being that current and expected rate
on municipal investment are inadequate to meet the water quality
requirements by 1973. The industry's corres ponding rate has
been more adequate. Summary tables, diagrams, maps in-
cluded. .
.'
A.. 14
-------
Vol. 2: Appendix, v, 541 p.
This appendix provides the statistical data from 1962 and
1968 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration Municipal
Waste Treatment Inventories, and State water quality standards
implementation plans. .
Vol. 3: Sewage Charges, viii, 103 p. (L'references cited,"
pp. 98-103).
This is a review of methods of financing waste water col-
lection and treatment systems with discussion of the user
charge program by local governm.ent units as a means of rais-
ing needed revenues. The analysis of various user charge s ys-
terns is provided on the basis of results of a model system
analys is.
The data on
summary table s
sewerage charges by state are presented in
(Appendix) .
Vol. 4: Proiected Water Treatment Costs in the Organic Chem-
icals Industries.
(1) five -year projected range of cost estimates for attaining
various levels of wate l' pollution controls, and (2) improved
methodology for projecting treatment cost estimates for other
industries (models) are discus sed.
36.
(1970) U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. The
Economics of Clean Water. Washington, D. C. : U. S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1970, 4 v. (bibliography in vol. 3,
pp. 460-467, Appendix F). .
Vol. 1: Detailed Analysis, xi, 168 p. " tables and charts.
'Contains analysis of the investment trends and needs in pol-
lution facilities treatment, Federq.l cost sharing, priority sys-
tems, public treatment of industrial wastes, regional-waste-
handling systems, and the facilities evaluation model. Sum-
mary statistical tables are included.
Vol. 2: Animal Wastes Profile, xv, 85 p., tables, diagrams,
maps.
Overview of animal wastes production, and of cost estima-
tion, common characteristics of animal wastes discharged to
water (by type of animal) and control methods are described.
A.15
-------
Vol. 3:. Inorganic Chemicals Industry Profile, xvii, 467 p.
(bibliography, Appendix F, pp. 460-467).
Projected industry growth, waste water characteristics,
treatment methods and industrial waste treatment practices,
plant survey data, costs of unit waste water treatment methods,
costs versus effluent quality relationships, projected industry
costs and manpower requirements .are discussed and statistical
data included. .
Vol. 4: Summary Report, ix, 41 p.
This report combines the concept of investment processes
developed in the 1969 report with the generally held concept of
an investment gap that was evaluated in the 1968 report.
Its product is the definition of rate of investment that will
close the gap for municipal and industrial waste treatment facil-
ities in the five year period (Introduction).
Sixteen summary tables on pollution control investments to
substantiate the analysis are inciuded.
37.
(1971) U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office. Cost of Clean Water. Washington,
ernment Printing Office, March, 1971. 2 v.
Water Quality
D. C. : U. S. Gov-
Vol. 1: Municipal Investment Needs, xi, 21 p.
The 1970 studies on assessment of needs are described.
Five summary cost tables are given in attachments. .
The result of the 1970 studies led to a request for $6 billion
Federal program, $2 billion in each of the FY 1972-1974 to
meet the total investment goals of $12 billion.
Vol. 2: Cost Effectiveness and Clean Water, xiv, 128 p.
The emphasis is put on the di$cussion of inefficiencies of
planning, design and operating of waste water treatments. The
conclusion is drawn that while construction sector inflation and
changing requirements will operate with increased cost, the
convincing evidence is that substantial savings in investment
requirements can result from cost-effective planning of munic-
ipal was te s ys tems.
The result of the user charge study and cost analysis show
that improvement of high order of municipal utility management
and an adequate user charge system may lead to self-su~ficient
municipal systems freeing them from the dependency on Federal
funds.
A.16
-------
1--
The investment needs of waste treatment facilities, trend
of waste discharges, diseconomies in public waste management
facilities, operation and maintenance costs are discussed in de-
tail. Over 30 summary tables on costs are included, as well
as maps and diagrams.
38.
U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. Water Pol-
lution Control, The Federal Costs, 1970/74. Washington, D.~.,
1969, 36 p.
It is a financial report for 1970-1974 submitted to the
Congress by the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion on the costs of carrying out provisions of the Federal Water
Pollution Act of 1966.
Report includes cost estimates on: comprehensive pro-
grams for water pollution control, grants to non-Federal water
pollution planning organization funds to uniform state laws and
interstate cooperation, Resource Development and Demonstra-
tion Program (municipal pollution control, other sources of
pollution control, water quality control, waste technology, and
dis posal, water quality requirements), costs of manpowe rand
training, etc.
39.
University of California, Graduate School of Business Administra-
tion. Mathematical Programming for Regional Water Quality
Management (with references). Prepared for the U. S. Water
Quality Administration, August, 1970. (Water Pollution Con-
trol Research Series, l6110FPX08/70). Washington, D. C. :
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1970.
Non-linear programming has been applied. to the problem
of optimal water quality control in Del'aware River Estuary.
The mathematical model developed gives solutions to the gen-
eral mixed case of a source treatQ.1.ent, regional treatment
plans and bypass piping.
The results indicate that a regional treatment system for
the Delaware Estuary is superior in terms of total cost to other
proposed schemes. Model formula and variables are discussed.
Statistical tables and diagrams are included.
A.17
-------
~~._--
- ..--- -~.... ~._.._.- .... --- -.-.'--
40.
Watson, K. S. "The Coordinated Industrial-Municipal-Regional
Approach to Air and Water Pollution Control. 11 Industrial Pol-
lution Control Handbook. Edited by H. F. Lund. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1971, Chapter 8, 28 p.
Specific case of industrial, municipal and regional cooper-
ation in water pollution control are des cribed. . The preparation,
coordination and financing of a joint approach for industries are
discussed. Regional air pollution control programs are also
included.
For an extensive survey of cost-benefit studies on water pollution pub-
lished in 1958-1967, see: Hinote, H. d.92.
A.18
-------
. D.
41.
42.
ECONOMICS OF INDUSTRIAL WATER
MANAGEMENT AND POLLUTION CONTROL
Berger, H. F. "Evaluating Water Reclamation Against Rising
Costs of Water and Effluent Treatment. II TAPPI, {{'he Journal
of the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry,
Vol. 49, No.8, 1966, pp. 79A-82A (diagrams and tables).
This is a description of a pilot plant for complete renova-
tion of total effluent from an unbleached kraft effluent. The
"cleaned Up'l water may be reused to avoid paying for new
water and the reclairned raw materials may be used again.
Costs and methods of reclaiming water are given. A theoret-
ical flow scheme for nearly closed kraft mill s ys tem is pre-
sented. Very clear presentation even to a non-technical reader.
Bubbis, N. S. "Industrial Waste Control in Metropolitan Winnepeg. 11
Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 35, No. 11,
1963, pp. 1403 -1409, Appendix.
Formula for surcharge of sewage payment is given (in the
Appendix). Payment depends on effluent characteristics, BOD,
chlorine demand, substances requiring additional treatment,
including benefits on installation of the pre-treatment facilities,
etc.
43.
Davis, R. K. "Some Economic Aspects of Advanced Waste Treat-
ments. 11 Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation,
Vol. 37, No. 12 (December, 1965), pp. 1617-1628.
Originally prepared for presentation to the Senate Select
Committee on Water Resources by Re'sources for the Future,
Inc., the paper presents detailed discussion of the economics
of optimization (or economic ef£ic~ency) of the waste water
treatment in the Potomac Estuary. The derivation of waste
treatment, requiren~ents, costs, and the model are discussed.
General conclusion: higher costs of waste water treatment are
associated with low-flow of water because of high BOD. Sev-
eral tables and diagrams are given.
44.
First National Symposium on Food Processing Wastes Proceedings,
April 6 -8, 1970. Held in Portland, Oregon. Sponsored by
Federal Water Quality Administration, Northwest Water Lab-
oratory, U. S. D. A., Western Regional Research Laboratory,
A.19
-------
National Canners Association, and Northwest Food Processors
Association. Washington, D. C. : Federal Water Quality Admin-
is t r a ti 0 n, 1 9 7 1, 4 0 5 po
An in-depth review of current research and demonstration
projects funded by the Federal Water Quality Administration on
water pollution control research is presented, including re-
search on improved in-plant and in-field processing intended
. to reduce the quantities of waste needing treatment in food in-
. dustries.
45.
Giglio, R. J., et al. "Regional Waste Water Management Systems. "
Developments in 'Vater Quality Research. Proceedings of the
Jerusalem International Conference on Water Quality and Pollu-
tion Research, June, 1969. Hille11. Shuval, general editor.
Ann.Arbor, Michigan: Humphrey-Science Publisher, 1970,
pp. 229 -239. .
General description of regional waste water management
system. Discussion of a mathematical model as a tool for
decision-making in planning. The subsystems of the model to
be quantified for various alternatives are: collection system,
trunk sewer, interceptor, treatrnent plant, and outfall sewer.
A diagram of the system is given. The model may be applied
to determine cost and feasibility of different alternatives to
help decision-making. A regional model is discussed. Useful
reading to an interested layman.
46.
Kerri, K. D. "An Economic Approach to Water Quality Control. "
Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 35,
No. 12 (December, 1966), pp. 1883-1897.
A discussion of the methods of regulating pollution dis-
charge: (1) effluent standards, and (2) stream standards. The
model developed determines the d~grees of treatment required
of each waste discharger in order to achieve a desired quality
of water at the minimum cost to all dischargers in the infested
region. The model favors industries by reducing degree of
treatment required because its marginal cost tends to be
greater than that of the municipalities. The purpose of the
model is to assist the regulatory agencies to examine discharge
requirements savings to the industries, by requiring effluent
standards instead of stream quality standards. The benefits
from the model may exceed high data collection expenses.
Many tables and diagrams are presented, but rather technical
reading, requires economic background.
A.20
-------
.. . ~ - - ---. -------- ---~.
. - -- . - ----- ~.__. .--- - -~--- - .._- --,
.------.~--
47.
Olliffe, J'. J. "Sewer Service Charges and Surcharges. " Journal
of the Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 35, No.5
(1963), pp. 607-613.
The article deals with sewer and water charges developed
in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The Sanitary Authority of
Allegheny County where Pittsburgh is located is the sole dis-
posal agency, but the municipalities are responsible for deliv-
ery of sewage and industrial wastes to predetermined points in
the Authority's Sewer system. Tables on the detail of rates,
analysis of rates, unit cost for quantity of sewage, etc., are
given. Also formulas used for surcharges depending on BOD,
SS, and chlorine demand are given. Very clearly presented
analysis.
48.
Paulson, E. G. "Water Pollution Control Programs and Systems. II
Industrial Pollution Control Handbook. Edited by H. F. Lund.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971, Chapter 6.
Very clear description of how to construct a water pollution
control system for discharged waste water. The phases of a
full pollution control program are as follows: (1) definition of
the problem and development of the action plan, (2) detailed en-
gineering, (3) construction and start-up, and (4) implementation.
Each of the phases is described in detail.
49.
Rocheleau, R. F.; and Taylor, E. F. "An Industry Approach to
Pollution Abatement. " Journal of the Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol. 36, No. 10 (1964), pp. 1185-1194.
The article presents some control methods applied to waste
water treatment. Emphasis is placed on in-plant waste water
treatment. The industrial approach does not hav~ to rely on
conventional waste water treatment proces ses. Often the satis-
factory water pollution control can be achieved by production
proces s controls and improvements. General approach should
be: Do not waste "Wastes." The difficulty lies in getting per-
sonnel to appreciate significance of the losses. One of the
methods may be an application of in-plant charges for waste
water discharge depending on quantity of waste. Production
people are keenly aware of their production costs and may
strive for its decrease by voluntary in-plant water quality
control.
A.21
-------
- ----------- - -------- -
. .---_. -- ~ ~ ---~--
50.
Russell, C. "Effluent Charges. " Economics of Air and Water Pol-
lution. Edited by W. R. Walker. (Virginia Polytechnic Institute,
Blackburg, Water Resource Center, Bulletin 26). Blackburg,
Virginia: Water Resources Research Center, Virginia Poly-
technic Institute, 1969, pp. 37-55 (bibliographic references in-
cluded.
An analysis of economics of effluent char'ges. Many tables.
51.
Thomas, R. V.; and Marks, D. H. "Result from a System Analysis
Approach to the Optimum Control of Estuarine Water Quality. "
Vol. 3 of Advances in Water Research Proceedings of the Third
International Conference. Held in Munich, Germany, Septem-
ber, 1966. Washington, D. C. : Wate r Pollution Control Feder-
ation, 1967, pp. 29-48.
This paper presents some results from a system analysis
approach to a given level of water quality for decision-making
to arrive at a desired (specified) water quality level. The
analysis is applied to the Delaware Estuary which is bordered
by a large metropolitan and industrial area (oil and chemical).
The basic mathematical model of physical environment and re-
sults of number of alternatives of water quality control model
are dis cus sed. Least-cost solutions are given.
52.
Weddle, C. L.; Mukherjee, S. K.; Porter, J. W.; and
Skarheim, H. P. "Mathematical Model for Water - Waste Sys-
tems. II Journal of American Water Works Association; Vol. 62,
No. 12 (December. 1970), pp. 769 -775.
Determining most economical uses of all water sources,
including conventional. Network analysis based model for
selecting least-cost water supply and waste water disposal
system for a municipal area.
53.
Weston, R. F. "Environmental Quality Control by Industry: Prob-
lems and Solutions." Water and Sewage Works (Chicago), 1970
Reference Number (November 28, 1970), pp. R223 -R22 7.
General views on pollution control, role of law enforce-
ment' financial and technical problems to industry are given.
The alternative methods as: (l) preventive measures, (2) on-
site treatment, and (3) off-site treatment and/or disposal are
mentioned. Definition of a role of a consultant, a designer and
constructor is given. Some statistics and curves on BOD in
petrochelnical plant, monthly flow and biological treatment are
presented.
A.22
-------
E.
54.
55.
56.
ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT OF SOLID WASTE
Clark, R. M. "Economics of Solid Waste Investment Decisions. 'I
American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of the Urban and
Development Division, Proceedings, Vol. 96, No. UP1, Proc.
Paper 7151 (March, 1970), pp. 65-79 (references, pp. 78-79).
The mathematical model of interdependence of engineering
design, timing and money supply in solid waste investments is
discus sed. The mathematical formulae and variable s are ana-
lyzed.
Combustion Engineering, Inc. Technical-Economic Study of Solid
Waste Disposal Need s and Practice s (Public Health Se rvice
Publication, 1886). Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government
Printing Office, 1969, 4 v.
The report presents an analysis of the statistical data col-
lected from 600 citie s in 1966 -196 7 on the amount of refuse
generated from residential and commercial sources, and on
the number of installed incinerators and composting plants in
the United States.
A na1ysis include s pre sentation of mathematical models to
predict capacity of installed incinerators and composting plants
in 1975 in the United States.
In addition, a mathematical model for the State of Connecti-
cut to predict the quantities of commercial, residential and in-
dustrial waste production and the requirements for waste reduc-
tion facilities in 1975 is presented.
This comprehensive study is di vided into four volume s: the
"Municipa1 Inventory" is given in Volume I, the "Industrial In-
ventory" in Volume II, the "Information System" in Volume III,
and "Technical Overview" in Volume IV.
Extensive statistical tables and lists of references are in-
cluded.
Engdahl, R. B. Solid Waste Processing: A State-of-the-Art Re-
port on Unit Operations and Processes. (D. S. Public Health
Service Publication, 1856) Washington, D. C.: U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1970, 77 p. (bibliography included).
Report is divided into two parts: (1) unit operations and
processes, and (2) major waste categories. Part one includes
concise description of the size reduction, separation, sanitary
landfill and open dumping, incineration, chemical processing
and recovery and utilization.
A.23
-------
57.
58.
In part two, under the major waste categories, a short de-
scription of method s of disposal of major pollutants (over 110)
is given in alphabetical order from Acetylen waste s through
Zirconium.
The bibliography of over 500 entries is included. Many
tables and diagrams are included.
The book, although meant for a technician, may be easily
used by an interested layman.
Gluckman, L. A., ed. IIPlanning for Solid Waste Management. 11
Symposium of State and Interstate Solid Waste Planning Agen-
cies. September 9-11, 1969, St. Louis, Missouri.
Washington, D. C.: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1971, 91 p.
. Reports on planning and data for solid waste disposal, in-
tergovernmental cooperation, solid waste legislation, etc.
Golueke, C. G., and McGauhey, P. H. Comprehensive Studies of
Solid Waste Management, First and Second Annual Reports.
(Public Health Service Publication, 2039). Washington, D. C.
Bureau of Solid Waste, HEW, 1970, 2 v. in one.
The First Annual Report discusses among the others, the
following aspects of solid waste management: the waste gener-
ation and evaluation model and waste collection treatment-
disposal model; planning and economic s: the Santa Clara
County study; public health and waste manageme nt; technology
of solid waste rnanagement and technological proce s se s of
solid waste disposal (anaerobic digestion with sewage sludge,
wet oxidation of organic waste s, biological fractiQntation of
organic wastes). Includes tables, diagrams and photos.
The Second Annual Report is structured along the same
line s, reporting on continuation of the studie s. The ope ra-
tion re search part of the study concentrate s on optimal loca-
tion and flow pattern and optimalization of treatment opera-
tion. The mathematical formulae are analyzed.
Economics concentrates on analysis of costs data of the
various treatment methods: hauling, landfill, composting, bio-
fraction, wet oxidation, etc. In the public health section, very
interesting summary tables are given on "Public Health Evalu-
ation of Demestic Wastes, 11 "Industrial Wastes, II "Commercial
Wastes, 11 and IISpecial Wastes, 11 i. e., junk automobiles. The
tables take up over 20 pages. Bibliographies are included after
each subject throughout the reports.
A.24
-------
59.
Comprehensive Studies
Third Annual Report. Washington,
Protection Agency, 1971, 201 p.
This is a continuation of the First and Second Annual Re-
ports. It concentrates on Planning and Econornics; Review of
Work to date is given. Structural models for various type s of
solid wastes are discussed in detail. The discussion of costs
studies of different methods of solid waste disposal is continued.
Model for ten-year forecasting of wastes loads for nine-county
San Francisco Bay Region is given. In continuation of the pro-
ce s se s of solid waste disposal (anerobic dige stion,incine ration,
wet oxidation, etc.), the experimental unit construction is dis-
cussed.
of Solid Waste Management.
D. C.: U. S. Environmental
60. Haskell, E. H. Managing the Environment: Nine States Look for
New Answers. Washington, D. C.: Smithsonian Institution,
April, 1971, 445 p.
This report describes recent changes initiated by nine state
governments to im.prove their management of the environment.
The focus is. on governmental structures designed to give fresh
impetus to existing environmental programs and on organiza-
tions which state s have created to carry out a new state re spon-
sibility, such as land-use control and waste treatment and dis-
posal. The an~lysis combine s the institutional de sign with legal
and environmental aspects. (Introduction)
61. Jones and Henry Engineers, Ltd. Proposal for a Refuse Disposal
System in Oakland County, Michigan, Final Report on Solid
Waste Demonstration G rant Project. (Public Health Se rvice
Publication, 1960). Washington, D. C.: Bureau of Solid Waste
Management, HEW, 1970, 146 p.
Study presents proposed solutions of facility for solid waste
disposals in a county. The design criteria, disposal methods,
and proposed solutions and costs of reuse are discus sed.
Tables include population projections, solid waste in tons and
costs.
Written clearly and not very technical, may be good refer-
ence for a layman.
62.
Marks, D. H.: and Liebman, J. C. Mathematical Analysis of Solid
Waste Collection, Final Report. (Public Health Service Publi-
cation, 2104). Washington, D. C.: Bureau of Solid Waste
A.25
-------
Management, HEW, 1970, 196 p. (bibliography, pp. 191-196).
This report repre sents an application of ope rations re search
to the analysis of solid waste collection system in a large metro-
politan area of Baltimore, Maryland.
A model for location of transfer facilities and large-scale
truck operation for waste disposal is developed. The model
may be applied to a smaller area with a smaller truck fleet.
The formulae and statistical data are included. This is a final
report on research work under Grant No. EC-00309 performed
at Johns Hopkins University, Department of Geography and
Environmental Engineering.
63. Morse, N.; and Roth, E. W. System Analysis of Regional Solid Waste
Handling. (Public Health Service Pulbication, 2065). Washing-
ton, D. C.: Bureau of Solid Waste Management, HEW, 1970,
125 p., Appendices. (References, pp. 121-123).
This report pre sents a systems analysis of regional solid
waste management - - the theoretical analysis, mathernatical
model and analysis of Buffalo (SMSA) as a sample area. Sta-
tistical table s and mathematical equations are given. Report
was prepared at Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, Inc., under
Contract No. PH 86-67-254.
64. Muhlich, A. J.; Klee, A. J.; and Britton, P. W. Preliminary
Data Analysis: 1968 National Survey of Community Solid Wastes
Practices. (Public Health Service Publication, 1867).
Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1968,
483 p.
The survey covers the SMSA I S and communities of 5, 000
population and smaller in 1967. The United States and territor-
ie s are divided into nine regions, and survey include s all land
disposal sites and public collectors, with exception of on-site
disposal or reduction facilities such as apartment house incin-
erators and household garbage grinders or self-contained small
business fa'cilities.
Statistical analysis includes: national analysis, urban
analysis, land disposal reports, and report on incinerators.
Statistical data covers more than 50 headings such as owner-
ship, size, actual amount of disposed matter, etc.
65. Muhlich, A. J.; Klee, A. J.; and Hampel, C. R. 1968 National
Survey of Community Solid Waste Practices. (Public Health
A.26
-------
Service Publication, 1866). Washington, D. C.: U. S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1968, 9 v.
The 1968 National Survey of Community Solid Waste Prac-
tices is a statistical data compilation in nine volumes (one for
each region).
The data are tabulated under such headings as
description, storage of refuse, disposal of refuse,
fiscal, collection of refuse, and many others.
community
budget and
66. (1966) National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council,
Committee on Pollution. Waste Management and Control: A
Report to the Federal Council for Science and Technology.
(NAS-NRC Pulbication, 1400). Washington, D. C.: NAS-NRC,
1966, 257 p.
First comprehensive descriptive, qualitative and quantita-
tive assessment of pollution problems; identifies the scientific
and technological areas which could assist in controlling pollu-
tion. This analysis influenced the Federal policies in pollution
control, and was instrumental in the creation of the Bureau of
Solid Waste Management as a Federal institution responsible
for solid waste pollution control. Sometime s called the
Spilhaus Report from the name of the Committee Chairman,
Athelstan Spilhaus.
67. (1970) National Academy of Science s -National Academy of Engi-
neering, Ad Hoc Committee on Solid Waste Management of the
Division of Engineering, Committee on Pollution Abatelnent and
NAS. Policies for Solid Waste Management. (Public Health
Service Publication, 2018). Washington, D. C.: Bureau of Solid
Waste Management, HEW, 1970, 64 p. (Selected Bibliography,
pp. 58 - 64) .
This report is an evaluation of the 1966 NAS-NRC report.
The study analyses: institutional activities in present and
future, NAS-NRC waste management recommendations, and
functions of the Bureau of Solid Waste Management. The gen-
eral view of solid waste technologies is included, as well as
estimate s of the costs of implementation of recommended action
for the future _objectives in solid waste management on the Fed-
e ral level.
68. Ross, R. D., ed. Industrial Waste DiDposal. (Van Nostrand-
Reinhold Environmental Engineering Series). New York:
Van Nostrand-Reinhold Company, 1971.
A.27
-------
A textbook on the waste gas and waste liquid treatment,
incineration, and radioactive waste managenlent. The most
recent engineering methods are presented with emphasis on
environmental protection. Textbook for engineers.
69. Solid
Waste Management Plan, Statute Report, 1970. Rockville,
Maryland: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1971-
date, several volumes.
Reports submitted by 14 states (D. C., California, Kentucky,
Oregon, etc.) to encourage systematic planning for better man-.
agement of the nation's solid waste. Each report includes sur-
vey of laws and legislation, method of collection, disposal, en-
vironmental effects of solid waste (many documentary photo-
graphs of unsightly waste dumps), solid waste planning, etc.
Include s statistic s, maps, and diagrams.
70. Tofner, R. O. Developing a State Solid Waste Management Plan.
(Public Health Service Publication, 2031). Washington, D. C. :
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1970, 50 p.
Description of the basic features of the planning process
and their utilization in the development of a state plan for its
solid waste management. Purpose of this publication is to aid
state s in preparing comprehensive solid waste management
plans. Flow chart of basic planning model is included.
71. Tofner, R. 0.: and Clark, R. M.
to Solid Waste Management
Rockville, Maryland: Solid Waste Management Office, Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, 1971, 17. p.
Paper contains discus sion of the form for intergovern-
mental coordination of solid waste management: SMSA? COG?
Counties? Development of any intergovernmental system in-
volve s creation of a region-wide intergovernmental jurisdiction
and an actual organization. The organization should have
authority to manage and control solid wastes, therefore, must
be given financial base, manpower and power of control and
evaluation of the systems operation and performance.
Intergovernmental Approaches
72. Truitt, M. M.; Lieberman, J. C.; and Krause, C. W. Mathemat-
ical Modeling of Solid Waste Collection Policies. (Public
Health Service Publication, 2030). Washington, D. C.: U. S.
G ove rnment Printing Office, 2 v.
A.28
-------
The report is a re sult of refuse collection survey in urban
residential area of Baltimore and its environs. Three models
were prepared (with different population densities, haul dis-
tances, size of trucks, etc.) for refuse collection system. The
models may be applied to any city or urban area.
Discus sion of the mathematical model is contained as an
aid to decision-making for solid waste management is diccussed
in volurne two: l'Userls Guide to the Johns Hopkins Solid Waste
Collection Simulation Model. II
This is a final report on research work performed under
Grant No. VI-00539 at Johns Hopkins University, Department
of Geography and Environmental Engineering.
73. University of Louisville, Institute of Industrial Research.
Louisville, Ky. -Ind. Metropolitan Region Solid Waste Disposal
Study, Inte rim Report on Solid Waste Demonstration Project,
Vol. 1: Jefferson County, Kentucky. Washington, D. C. :
Bureau of Solid Waste Management, HEW, 1970, 205 p.
Study of cur rent conditions of the area (SMSA) refuse quan-
tities and composition, alternative disposal n~ethods (transfer
stations, sanitary landfill, incine ration, etc.), transporation
system analysis (model), and land requirements. An example
of the interstate managen~ent organization.
74. U.S.
Congres s, House, 91 st Congress, 2nd Se ssion, Committee
on Science and Astronautics, Subcommittee on Science Research
and Development. Technology and Solid Waste Management.
By A. S. Darney, Hearings, Technology Assessment, 1970.
Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, .1970..
pp. 901-913.
Discus sion of the following cur rent problems in solid waste
management: (1) the increasing per capita generation of waste
(table) (2) technical problems in waste processing, and
(3) absence of markets for recoverable waste commodities
due to uncontrolled production of new materials, which cause
difficulities in equipment designed for traditional waste dis-
posal and cannot be recovered.
New directons:- (1) the waste management should anitci-
pate and prevent problems by monitoring the industrie s to
prevent production of products which cannot be recycled,
(2) there is a need for research in new methods and equipment
of waste collection, and (3) nece s sity for reorganization on
local levels for efficiency and more economic operations.
A.29
-------
76.
75.' U. S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Solid Waste
Program. Solid Waste Handling in Metropolitan Area.s. pre-
pa red for the Surgion G enerall s Advi sory Committee on Urban
Health Arfiars. (Public Health Service Publication, 1554).
Cincinnati, Ohio: Solid Waste Program, I-IEW, 1968, 41 p.
The economic impact and policy questions of solid waste
handling are discussed alY10ng the other aspects. Concise sum-
mary of the waste problems in metropolitan areas. Bibliog-
raphy and listing of the re search projects between 1960-1964
are included.
Vaugham, R. D. Solid Waste Management: The Federal Role.
Cincinnati, Ohio: U. S. Department of Health, Education and
Welfare, 1969, 22 p. .
Presented at the Environmental Equilibrium: Criteria,
Cost, Cooperation, National Pollution Control Conference and
Exposition, Houston, April 22 -24, 1969.
77.
Weaver, L., ed. Proceedings: The Surgeon General's Conference
on Solid Waste Management for Metropolitan Washington,
Julv 19-20, 1967. (Public Health Service Publication, 1729).
Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1967,
194 p.
The proceedings of a two-day conference on various aspects
of the solid waste disposal in metropolitan Washington, D. C.
The subjects discussed are grouped under three large headings:
Present practices and needs in the metropolitan area, Tech-
nology today, and Development of a regional solid waste dis-
posal plan. The experience of Washington, D. C. may be
applied to any metropolitan area.
A.30
-------
~--~c=.~o_.==~-~.~~ ~,,~.
I
!
F.
LEGIS LA TION AND ADMINIS TRA TION
78.
Baldwin, F. B., ed. Legal Control of Water Pollution. (Univer-
sity of California Law Review, Vol. 1). Davis, California:
School of Law, University of California, 1969, x, 273 p.
(Bib1iographical footnote s).
79.
Blatnik, J. A. "History of Federal Pollution Control Legislation. II
Industrial Pollution Control Handbook. Edited by H. F. Lund.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971, Chapter 2.
Concise history of Federal acts pertaining to water pollu-
tion control since nineteenth century to present is given.
Water Quality Act of 1965 and Clean Water Restoration
Act of 1969 are analyzed in detail. .In contrast to previous acts,
the 1965 -1966 Acts provided for a comprehensive water pollu-
tion control action. The Federal Water Pollution Control Ad-
ministration has been established to carry out comprehensive
studies of needs and costs of waste water treatrnent installa-
tions, to establish water quality standards, and to implement
them in the next five years (1969-1975).
Summary tables of sewage treatment needs in the largest.
100 cities, and sumrnary costs to meet the provisions of the
Federal Pollution Act of 1966, and the Wate r Pollution Control
Funding Gap ar~ given.
80.
Degler, 'S. E.; and Bloom, S. C. Federal Pollution Control Pro-
grams: Water, Air and Solid Wastes. Washington, D. C.:
Bureau of National Affairs Books, 1969.
Includes texts of legislations, Federal water pollution
quality standards and enforcem ent programs.
81.
Environm.ental Reporter: Federal Laws. Washington, D. C. :
Bureau of National Affairs, 1970-date (loose leaf).
Includes Federal laws on air and water pollution control,
solid waste disposal, water supply, noise, pesticides and radi-
ation.
82.
. .
Environmental Reporter: State Water Laws. Washington,
Bureau of National Affairs, 1970-date (loose leaf).
Contains the water pollution control statutes of the
the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, in full text.
50s ta te s ,
D.C. :
A.31
-------
- .---.~, ~_.-- -.........;...;.~.-..---~,. ---
83.
League of Women Voters of the United States. Current Review of
Water Resources, No.3 (August, 1966).
Includes 24 bills for water pollution presented to the
Congres s in 1966.
84.
Murphy, E. F. Water Purity: A Study in Legal Control of Natural
Resources. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1961,
212 p. (Bibliography, pp. 162-164).
The book presents a discussion of basis for water resource
regulations, history of their changes, transition to central ad-
ministration water pollution control, historical development
and operation of the State central adnlinistrative agency. More
than 80 legal cases against the water pollutants in Wis.consin
and other states are discussed.
85.
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendment of 1968. Report of the Com-
mittee on Public 'Norks, U. S. Senate, to accompany S. 3201,
90th Congress, 2nd Session, Report No. 1447. Washington,
D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1968, 33 p.
86.
The Solid Waste Disposal Act. Title II of Public Law 89-272, 89th
Congress, S. 306, October 20, 1965, Public Law 91-512, 91st
Congres s, House 11833, October 26, 1970 as amended.
Washington, D. C.: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste Management Office, 1971, 17 p.
87.
U. S. Congress, House, 91st Congress, 2nd Session, Committee
on Public Works. Laws of the United States Relating to Water
Pollution Control and Environmental Quality. (Committee
Print, 91-33, July, 1970). Washington, D. C.: U. S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1970, III, 265 p.
88.
Wilkenfeld, J. "History of State and Local Pollution Laws. " Indus-
trial Pollution Control Handbook. Edited by H. F. Lund. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1971, Chapter 3.
Concise historical analysis of pollution control methods and
trends through ancient times, middle ages, the Victorian age,
and the modern age.
. Detailed interpretation of Federal Water Quality Act impli-
cations to local governments. Short descriptions of several
existing local legislations in New Jersey, New York, San
Francisco Bay and others.
A.32
-------
.---,~-- - ~.:-:---:.;.~;;z--~.--:----
G.
BIBLIOGRAPHIES AND REFERENCE TOOLS
89.
"Glossary: Industr ial Air Pollution Control Terms, Industrial
Water Pollution Control Terms. II Industrial Pollution Control
Handbook. Edited by H. F. Lund. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1971, pp. 1-39.
90.
Golueke, C. G.; and Staff of the College of Engineering, University
of California. Solid Waste Management: Abstracts and Ex-
cerpts from the Literature. (Public Health Service Publication,
2038). Washington, D. C.: Bureau of Solid Waste Management,
HEW, 1968-1970, 3 v. (Vol. 1 (1968); Vol. 2 (July, 1969);
Vol. 3 (August, 1970)).
This is an extensive bibliography with abstracts covering
profes sional journal literature from 1958 through 1970. Some
foreign literature is included. Extent of the coverage can be
. shown by listing just a few of the classifications covered: Man-
agement, Collection and Transport, Economics, Disposal,
Salvage, Agricultural and Food Processing Waste, Environ-
mental and Public Health, etc.
91.
Great Britain. Ministry of Technology. Water Pollution Abstracts.
London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office. (Vol. 42, 1969;
Vol. 44, 1971).
Abstracts of literature in all aspects of water pollution are
included. .
92.
Hinote, H. Benefit-Cost Analysis for Water Resource Proiects:
A Selected Annotated Bibliography. Rev. ed. Knoxville,
Tennessee: Center for Business and Economic Research,
University of Tennessee, June, 1969.
Extensive coverage of the cost-benefit studies done between
1958-1967. Detailed annotations included.
93.
Lefke, L. W.; Keene, A. G.; and Chapman, R. A. Summaries of
Solid Waste Research and Training Grants: 1970. Washington,
D. C.: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste
Management Office, 1971, 134 p.
Listing of the research in progres s on solid waste and its
disposal in 1965 -19 75, supported by Federal grants. Each de-
scription includes the list of publications already issued in con-
nection with the research. Subjects presented: Compost and
A.33
-------
;"'.
Composting, Farm Fields Wastes, Hospitals, Planning and
Management, Reclamation and Reuse, etc.
94.
Levine, B. S. U.S.S. R. Literature on Water Supply and PC}l-
lution Control, A Survey. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Depart-
ment of Commerce, Clearinghouse for Federal and Scientific
Information, 1962. (Vol. 1, 1961; Vol. 2, 1962; Vol. 3, 1962;
Vol. 4, 1962; Vol. 5, no date; Vol. 6, IICondition for the Sani-
tary Discharge of Sewage and Waste Water into Natural Water Basins, 11
By S. N. Cherkinskij, 1962 (translated from Russian by B. S. Levine).
These six volumes contain translations of articles fro111
Russian technical journals in sanitary engineering, che111istry,
biology and others dealing with water pollution. Emphasis is
put on technical proces ses. Numerous diagrams, tables and
bibliographies (in Russian) are included.
95.
Pollution Abstracts. Published six times yearly (May, June,
August, September, October, Decem.ber. La Jolla, 'California:
6811 La Jolla Boulevard. (Vol. 1, 1970; Vol. 2, 1971).
96.
Research in Selected Problems in Sewage Treatment Pro;ect, Bibli-
ography on Coagulation and Sedimentation in Water and Sewage
Treatm.ent. PTepared with the assistance of official project
No. 45-97-3-35, IIResearch in Selected Problems in Sewage
Treatment. II Directed by L. V. Carpenter. U. S. Work Proj-
ects Administration for the City of New York, 2nd ed., 1939.
Very thorough bibliography of technical processes in waste
water treatment. Arranged in chronological sequence. May be
useful from historical point of view.
97.
Tofner, R. 0., et al. State, Solid Waste Planning Grants Agencies
and Progress, 1970. Report of activities through June 30, 1970.
Washington, D. C.: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Solid Waste Management Office, 1971.
Listing of projects in progress in solid waste disposal re-
search, by state.
98.
U. S. Bureau of Solid Waste Management.
ment: A List of Available Literature.
I January, 1971.
, April, 1971.
, July, 1971.
Solid Waste Manage-
Cincinnati: June, 1970.
A.34
-------
100.
10 1.
Includes the list of publications available on request from
the Bureau in Cincinnati. In subsequent lists, the out-of-print
publications have been deleted. .
99.
U. S. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. Water Pol-
lution Control: Waste Treatment and Water Treatment, Selected
Biological References on Fresh and Marine Waters. By. R. K.
Stewart, W. M. Ingram, and K. M. MacKenthun. Washington,
D. C.: 1966, 126 p. illus.
Selected references dealing with water quality and use have
been prepared for persons interested in and responsible for
biological as pects of water pollution control, waste treatment
and water treatment.
Supercedes four previous publications: (1) Public Health
Service Publication 214, 1953, (2) Public Health Service Publi-
cation 214, revised 1957, (3) Estuarine and Marine Pollution
(Public Health Service Technical Report W-61-4, 1961), and
(4) Public Health Service Publication 1053, 1963.
Most references of previous publications have been re-
tained and selected references subsequent to 1962 -1965 added.
U. S. Government Printing Office. Monthly Catalog of United
States Government Publications. Wasbington, D. C.: 1969 to
date.
List of the publications of all the branches of Federal gov-
ernment. The publications on water pollution, waste and eco-
nomics are included.
U. S. Public Health Service. Handbook of Selected Biological Ref-
erences on Water Pollution Control, Sewage Treatment, Water
Treatment, by W. M. Ingram. (Public Health Service Publi-
cation 214, Revised 195 7). Washington, D. C.: U. S. Public
Health Service, Water Supply and Water Pollution Control Pro-
gram, 1957, 95 p. illus.
Selected biological references on water pollution control
(including bottom organisms, fish, bioassays and methods, etc.),
sewage treatrnent (including organisms of overall sewage treat-
ment, organisms of oxidation ponds, etc.), water treatment
(including taste and odor control, algae, insects, etc.), and on
organism identification.
A.35
-------
102.
U. S. Public Health Service. Refuse Collection and Disposal: A
Bibliography. (Public Health Service Bibliography Series,
No.4).
Complete listing of this series includes:
Refuse Collection and Dis posal: A Bibliograph\T, 194'1-1950
(PHS Publication No. 91, 1951), out of print.
Refuse Collection and Disposal: A Bibliography, 1951-1953
(PHS Publication No. 91, Supplement A), 1954.
Refuse Collection and Disposal: An Annotated Bibliography,
1954-1955 (PHS Publication No. 91, Supplement B), 1956.
Refuse Collection and Disposal: An Annotated Bibliography,
1956-1957 (PHS Publication No. 91, Supplement C), 1958.,
Refuse Collection and Disposal: An Annotated Bibliography,
1958-1959 (PHS Publication No. 91, Supplement D), 1961.
Refuse Collection and Disposal: An Annotated Bibliography,
1960-1961 (PHS Publication No. 91, Supplement E), 1963.
Refuse Collection and Disposal: An Annotated Bibliography,
1960-1961. By R. J. Black and P. L. Davis. Revised 1966.
(PHS Publication No. 91, Supplement E, revised 1966).
Refuse Collection and Disposal: An Annotated Bibliography,
1962 -1963. By R. J. Black, J. B. Wheeler and '\V. G.
Henderson. (PHS Publication No. 91, Supplement F, 1966).
The main subjects covered are: regulations (including the
legislations), finances, storage and various methods of collec-
tion and dis posal. '
, ,
A.36
-------
H.
-::~',~. ~
. "."," "''''(', .',.'"
T'ables On Major Water Polluting
Industries and Major Waste Categories
Table 1 -- Major Polluting Industries
Code
201
2011
2013
2015
202
2021
2022
2023
2026
203
2033
2034
2035
2037
204
2041
2043
2046
205
206
207
208
2082
2084
2085
2086
Source:
Food and Kindred Products
Meat products
Meat slaughtering plants
Meat proces sing plants
Poultry dres sing plants
Dairies
Crearnery butter
Natural and process cheese
Condensed and evaporated milk
Fluid milk
Canned and frozen foods
Canned fruits and vegetables
Dehydrated foods products
Pickles, sauces, salad dressings
Frozen fruits and vegetables
Grain mills
Flour mills
Cereal preparations
Wet corn milling
Bakery products
Sugar
Candy and related products
Beverages
Malt liquors
Wines and brandy
D is tilled liquor
Soft drinks
Lacy, W. J., -and H. G.Keeler, "Federal Water Quality
Administration Research, Development and Demonstration
Program", the First National Symposium on Food Processing
-Wastes Proceedings, pp. 5-16. Washington, D. C.: Federal
Water Control Administration, 1970.
A.37
-------
~.' , ,"""1' "",....,.,."
Tab Ie 1 (continued)
Code
209
2091
2092
2094
2096
Miscellaneous foods and kindred products
Cottonseed oil mills
Soybean oil mills
Animal and marine fats and oils
Shortening and cooking oils
Textile Mill Products
2211
2221
2231
225
226
228
229
Weaving mills, cotton
Weaving mills, synthetic
Weaving, finishing mills, wool
Kni tting mills
Textile finishing, except wool
Yarn and thread mills
Miscellaneous textile goods
24
Lumber and Wood products
242
2421
Savlrnills and planing mills
Sawmills and planing rnills
26
Paper and Allied Products
2611
2621
2631
264
265
2661
Pulp mills
Paper mills, except building
Paperboard mills
Paper and paperboard products
Paperboard containers and boxes
Building paper and board mills
28
Chemicals and Allied Products
281
2812
2818
2819
282
2821
2823
2824
283
Basic chemicals
Alkalies and chlorine
Organic chemicals, n. e. c.
Inorganic chernicals, n. e. c.
Fibers, plastics,rubbers
Plastics n~aterials and resins
Cellulosic man-made fibers
Organic fibers, noncellulosic
Drug s
A.38
.. "-
. . ''';'.,_..._--''''':~~:':_---._'-
-------
;;j:,,,--:,:,,._;;r;-.--::-:-----;,,,..:;,.,-,,. ...
, -":"". ,.,' "'..'..
" , ..,--. ~.".
. - ---- -. --.
., --'.' "',
Table 1 (continued)
Code
284
2851
2861
287
289
Cleaning and toilet goods
Paints and allied products
Gum and wood chemicals
Agricultural chemicals
Miscellaneous chemical products
29
Petroleurn and Coal Products
2911
295
Petroleum refining
Paving and roofing materials
30
Rubber and Plastics Products, n. e. c.
3069
3079
Rubber products, n. e. c.
Plastics products, n. e. c.
31
Leather and Leather Products
3111
Leather tanning and finishing
32
Stone, Clay, and Glass Products
3211
3341
325
326
327
3281
329
Flat glas s
Cement, hydraulic
Structural clay products
Pottery and related products
Concrete and plaster products
Cut stone and stone products
Nonmetallic mineral products
33
Primary Metal Products
331
332
333
3341
Steel rolling and finishing
Iron and steel foundries
Primary nonferrous metal
Secondary nonferrous nletals
A.39
-------
"--'~ ...~-_._-~_---=c----c..-_-c-.-,,-~~.:--------.-_._-"~ ....~ < ----~_.
, - -~ - -- -" -'~~
Table 2
Industrial Source vs. Significant Constituent Pollution
Sector Constituc.:,.t
BOD SS IDS Acid ii8avy 0'1 -:J.
~~ ...,t
i',et31s
Netal and metal products X X X X X
Chemicals af.1d al Hed
products X X
Po\,'e r production
Paper and allied products X )~ .
Petroleum and coal
produc ts 'X X X
Food and kindred
products X X' X
l'1acld.ncry and
'tnmsportatj.on ,.
eq'uipment X X X X
Stone, clay and gl2.sS
products X X
Textile mill products X X
Lumber and "Iood
products X X X
Rubber and plastic X X
Source:
Lacy, W. J. and H. G. Keeler, "Federal Water Quality
Administration. Research, Development and Demonstration
Program, " First National Symposium on Food Processing
Wastes Proceedings. Washington, D. C., Federal Water
,Quality,Administration. 1970.
A.40
-------
'-~"""_II''''''~-'~- ._----.:oo.;-.......~-..-~~",..._---------....:_---.......;...- 0'- __--';___0_00____- ----. ~
Table 3
War.te Generation Coefficients, after Bower, RFF
2011
2026
2033
2037
2061
2062
2085 I
2261 .
2262
2621
2631
2641
2654
2911
3111
Standard Industria}
Classification Sector
Pounds BOD!EGPlovee
Neat packing
4596
Fluid milk
1770
Canned fruits and vegetables
16200
Frozen fruits and vegetables
24450
Ravl carte s u ga r
3336
Cane sugar refining
3L~20
Distilled liquor
3000
Finishing plants, cotton
33200
Finishing plants, synthetic
11580
,Paper mills
28960
Paperboard mills
45200
Pap~r coating and glazing
4260
Sanitary food containers
4500
Petroleum refining'
8l,00
Leather tanning
14700
Lacy, W. J. and H. G. Keeler, IIFederal Water Quality
, Administration, Research, Development and Demonstration
Program, 11 First National Symposium on Food Processing
Wastes Proceedings, Washington, D. C., Federal '.Vater
Quality Administration. 1970.
Source:
A.41
-------
---------
. .. -
.. .- ._~--'-:_'..-....._...-_.
--"",-......~.......:-..-...............-.---.....----..;.....-~~~-=---=-::.---~ :;;
Tab Ie 4
Major Waste Categories
Acel~'lcne 'V:-Istes
Agricultural Wastes
Aluminum
Animal-Product Hesiducs
Ant.imony
J\sbcstos
Ash. Cinders. Flue Dust. Fly Ash
Asphalt.
)3:tgnssc
Bam:it.e l~esidue
}3cryllium
BismuU,
Brass
Brc\\"in~~. DisWJing, Fennenting
'Vast.es
Brid Plant Waste
13ron;:(:
Cadmium
Cnkium
Ca.rbictel;
Carbonaceous ShaJc3
C)1('mical '\Tastes
Chromium
. Cinders
Coal
Cohalt
CoH(:e
Coke-Ovcn Gas
Copper
Col.l.on
Dairy Wastes
Diamond Grinding Wheel Dust
Distilling 'V3sl.cs
Elcet.roplnt.ing' Hcsidues.
Ferment.ing V,'asLes
Fish'
Flue Dust
Fluorine
F'l~' Ash
Foocl-Proeessin~ 'Vastes
Foundr~' Wastes
Fruit Wastes
Fu I'll i tu re
Gcrm3nium
Glass
Glass Wool
Gypsum
Hemp
]-Iydror:cn Fluoride
Inorganic R.e~,idues
Iron
Lead
Lealher Fabricat.ing' and Tannery
Wastes
Leaves
Source:
.: :'". .
Lime
]'vIagllesium
Manganese
l\Hca
J\.finernl Wool
1\1olasses
l'vlolybdcnulll
J\'Iunicip31 Wnf.tes
Nonferrous Scrap
Nuls.
Nylon
Organie \Vast.es
Paint
Paper
. Pel rolcul11 Residues
Phot.ographic Paper
Pickle: I...iquor
Plastic'
POppy.
Pol.Len' Wa"Les
]?redow; T.:, ('La].')
Pulp and Paper'
Pyril.e Cinders and Tailings
H,c[ra dory
llefrigcra tors
]~icc
Eubber
, Sal Skimmings
Sane!
Spa fON!
ShingJes
, Sbal
S1a~
Sodium
S t.a rch
stone Spa.]!s
Sugar Beds
Sugar Canc
Sulfur
Tant.alum
Tct.raet.hylleacl
Tcxt.iles
Tin
Tit.aniul1l
Tobacco
Tungsten
Uranium
Vanadium
Veget.able Wastes
'Vast.ep:'\])er
Wood Wa,5tcs
Wool
yttrium
Zinc
Zircaloy
Zirconium
Engdahl, R. B., Solid Waste Proce s sing, A State- of- the -A rt
Report on Recent Operation Proces3.es, 1969, U. S. Public
Health Service Publication No. 1856.
A.42
-------
I.~'~ '
I
....~~ '...< ~"-
, ..~, :J7.-.~; ~~- ~.~';,.~:"';~'2::..~~~'c;.'~~-----:..-::::::>~.~::rI~:'~~- .
" ." ".'~' "'~""';:.'~-2~:lr_.,..,.,,~~~_., - ..".
-............-~~ ---,..~,,-- ," '~''-,.. .-....,.,.~.,-~,--. .,~." -",... ",'--
--- ._- -.""", ~ "-"-.-. . . .. ~
APPENDIX B
FIVE KEY ECONOMIC INDICATORS OF
91 AQCRs UNDER ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
FOR 1975 OR 1976
-------
-~_::_'. :'--.---,-.... -'---... -,-,'--'-"--'- - --- ----.-- .~--
.. - ... - "
--..-.--..-'-'-"- -- _n.__-- -<--'---'-- -
. ..
..
,
Stra~egy 1 ,
Three Year Implementation 1973-1975 Without
G ove rnment Financial Assistance For 19.75
Benefit = $10.0 Billion
% change % change Reg. Reg.
Mfg. PrcJ. ~Hg. In- Per- Unem- Local
-.'" "
AQCR (value vest- sonal rnnt. Govt.
Code AQCR added) rnent Inc. Rate Revenue
1 New York, New York - .11 - 9.06 - .04 .096 - .04
2 Chicago, Illinois - .84 -14.08 - .44 .467 - .70
3 Los Angeles, Calif. - . lO - 5. 18 - .03 .019 - .03
4 Philadelphia, Pa. - .42 - 7.04 - .20 . 195 - .29
5 Detroit, Michigan - .84 - 9.09 - .49 .529 - .64
6 San Francisco, Calif. - . 72 -23.88 - . 13 .081 - .13
7 Mas s.. .20 6.35 .08 - . 105 . 11
Boston, - - - -
8 Pittsburgh, Pa. -3.26 -28.11 -1. 56 1. 089 -2.28
9 St. Louis, lvlis souri -1.19 -19.34 - . 61 .614 - .94
10 Washi.ngton, D. C. -1. 58 -24.42 - . 14 .266 - . 16
11 Cleveland, Ohio -1.17 -13.13 - .52 .399 - .75
12 BaltirYlore, :tv1aryland -1. 32 -15.84 - .57 .455 - .65
14 Minneapolis -St. Paul,
J\1innesota - .25 - 7,86 - . 15 . 211 - . 19
15 Houston, Texas - .57 - 6.05 - ,30 , 161 - .41 I
16 Buffalo, New York -1.61 -16.42 -1.01 .751 - .96
-
17 Milwaukee, Wisconsin - 1. 08 -18.85 - . 83 ,906 - . 83
18 Cincinnati, Ohio - .58 -12.02 - .39 .485 - . 51
19 Louisville, Kentucky - .44 - 7.70 - .47 .584 - .67
20 Dal1as, T exa s - . 12 - 2. 38 - .06 .071 - . 11
I Wash.
21 Seattle -Eve rett, - .67 -10.55 - .24 . 176 - .34
22 l<'ansa s City, Mis soud - .35 -10,39 - .20 . 159 - .30
23 San Diego, Calif. .07 - 1. 24 . 01 -.007 . 01
24- Atlanta, G eOl;gia - . 11 - 4,97 .07 -.048 . 10
25 Indianapolis, Indiana - 1. 06 - 22. 19 - .55 .444 - .80
26 Miami, Florida - . 12 - 2.38 - .02 . 019 - .03
27 Denver, Colorado - .37 - 6.87 - . 15 . 190 - . 19
28 New Orleans, Louisiana - .32 - 4,96 - .08 .038 - . 12
29 Portla.nd, Oregon - .87 -18.90 - .32 .277 - . 41
30 Providence - Pawtuckett,
Rhode Island - . 36 - 6,34 - . 16 . 134 - .26
31 Phoenix, Arizona - .26 - 1. 38 - . 14 .225 - . 15
32 T an1pa, Florida - . 63 - 8.94 - . 11 . 115 - . 13
33 Columbus, Ohio - .50 - 7.65 - .18 . 159 - .27
34 San Antonio, T exa s - .63 - 6,56 - . 10 . 112 - . 16
35 Dayton, Ohio - .25 - 4.76 - .22 .269 - .33
36 B irminghaln, Alabalna -4.8.4 -58.81 -2.09 '1.296 - 3. 1'0
37 Toledo, Ohio -1. 26 -16.08 - .76 . 616 - 1. 07
38 Steuben.ville- Weirton, Ohio/
. Wheeling, We s t Vir gin ia -8.76 -28.50 -6.42 1. 730 -5.74
B. 1
-------
% change % change Reg. I Reg. I
Mfg. Prd. 1,,1£ g. In- Per- Une1n-; Local
I .
AQCR (value vest- so na 1 111 n t. !G ovt.
Code AQCR added) rnent Inc~ Rate IRevenue,
39 Chattanooga, Tenn. - .99 - 11. 62 - . 71 1 .410 - .86
40 Mernphis, Tennessee - . 31 - 8.81 - . 12 . 071 - . 15
41 Salt Lake City, Utah - .32 - 3. 16 - . 12 . 194 - . 14
42 Oklahoma City, Oklahol1.1.a - .66 - 7.20 - .19 .263 - .27
43 On1.aha, Nebraska - .41 - 8.00 - .30 .547 - .40
44 Honolulu, Hawaii - .30 - 6.96 - .04 .040 - .09
45 Beaun1.ont-Port Arthur-
Orange, l' e xa s -3.50 - 18~. 6 1 -4. 53 .899 -4.60
46 Charlotte, N. C. - .28 - 1. 63 - .22 .378 - .33
47 Portland, M.aine - .43 - 3.95 - .26 .427 - .46
48 Al buque r que, N. M. - . 10 - 4. 72 - .00 -.007 - .01
50 El Paso, l' exa s .03 - 1. 81 - . 02 .016 - .03
51 Las Vegas, Nevada - . 17 - 1. 80 - .02 .015 - .02
52 Far go -lvfoorhead, N.D.,
11inne s ota -2.17 -14.35 - .42 .742 - .40
53 Boise, Idaho - .48 - 8.83 - . 11 .226 ,.. . 15
54 Billings', Montana -5.00 -39.58 - .98 1. 310 -1.12
55 Sioux City, Io\va -2:- 02 -133.60 - .36 .340 - .49
61 A llento\'vn- Beth lehern -
Ea ston, Pa. -1.83 -10.25 - .98 .840 -1. 56
63 Bakersfield, Calif. -8.89 -75.14 - . 82 1.500 - . 57 I
64 Davenport-Rock Island - I
Moline , Iowa, Illinois -1.04 - 4.98 - .69 .552 - .90
66 Grand Rapids/Muskegon-
Muskegon Heights, Migh. -1.15 -10.72 - .59 .397 - .60
67 Greensboro, N. C. - .32 - 6.86 - .20 . 121 - .27
68 Harrisburg, Pa. - 1. 52 -21. 71 - .60 .644 - .85
69 Jacksonville, Florida -1. 69 -15.53 - . 31 .345 - .50
70 1< noxville, Tenn. - .95 -11.71 .- . 51 .553 - .69
71 Nashville, Tenn. - .36 - 4.85 - . 12 . 112 - . 16
72 Peoria, Illinois -1.17 - 8.30 - .70 .572 - 1. 07
73 Richmond, Virginia - .70 - 7. 16 - . 25 .240 - .43
74 Rochester, New York - .07 - 2.71 - .08 .081 - . 08
75 Saginaw/Bay City, Mich. - 1. 29 - 2.94 - .77 .842 - . 97
76 Sc ranton/,Yilke s Bar re -
Hazelton, Pa. -2.21 -35.07 -1. 23 1.780 -2.20
77 Syracuse, New York ,.1. 20 -12.87 - . 65 .754 - .57
78 Tulsa, Oklahoma - . 96 -18.40 - .29 .209 - .47
80 Y oungstown- IYarren,
Ohio - -2.95 -33.29 -1. 90 1.226 -2.94
81 Albany-Schenectady-
Troy, New York -1.08 - 11. 48 - . 39 .372 - .42
B.2
-------
AQCR
Code
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
AQCR
Bingharrlton, New York
Charleston, S. C.
Charle ston, W. Va.
De s l\1oine s, Iowa
Fresno, Calif.
Fort 'Wayne, Indiana
Jackson, Mississippi
Johnstown, Pa.
Lancaster, Pa.
Mobile, Alabama
Nor £olk- Portsrnouth /New-
port New s-Han'lpton, Va.
Raleigh/DurhalTI, N. C.
Reading, Pa.
Roc k£ord, Illinoi s
Sacramento, Calif
South Bend, Indiana
I Utica-Rome, New York
'-Wichita, I'\"ansas
I York Pa.
0/0 change I
M£g. Prd.
(value
added)
-.60
-1. 65
-1.11
- 1. 80
- 1. 54
-.72
-1.47
--1.05
-.93
-1.19
-1.32
- 1. 07
-2.23
-.66
--.72
-.65
-1.42
-. 17
-.45
% change I Reg.
Mfg. 1n- I Per-
ve st- Is onal
lTIent Inc.
-9.97
-8.47
-8.31
-23.05
-12.08
-13.18
-18.74
-5.52
-15.55
-15.10
-16.86
-7.67
-35.21
-8.32
- 9. 91
-5.24
-24.22
-14.98
-6.66
, -.44
-. 31
-.90
-.78
-.35
-.32
-.37
-. 61
-.69
-.37
-.22
-.35
- 1. 14
-.47
-. 16
-.50
-.90
-. 14
-. 31
I Reg. I
I Unem- Loca.l !
I rnnt. G OVt. !
,Rate Revenue'
j.600 -.36 I
I . 384 -.49 I
1.559' -1.38 j
I . 738 -1. 00 ,i
1.574 -.18
!
i-. 2 11 -. 5 5 I
I . 384 -. 43 I
!
1 . 902 -. 80 :
1.598 -"1.16 I
j.375 -.49 I
1.283 -.28 !
I . 758 - . 46 i
I .864 -1. 86 !
I . 288 -. 75 I
1.161 -.12 I
I I
1.696 -.64 !
I
1.966 -.85 !
I i
! . 1 72 -. 16 I
1.339 -.31 I
B.3
-------
Strategy.2
Five Year Extended Implementation Without
Government Financial Assistance for 1976
Benefit = $10.0 Billion
AQCR1
Code I AQCR
1 New York, New York
2 Chicago, Illinois
3 Los Angeles, Calif.
4 Philadelphia, Pa.
5 Detroit, Michigan
6 San Francisco, Calif.
7 Boston, Mass:
8 Pittsburgh, Pa.
9 St. Louis, Iv1issouri
10 Washington, D. C.
11 Cleveland, Ohio
12 Baltin>.ol'e, :Maryland
14 Minneapolis-St. Paul,
l'vUnne s ota
Houston, Texa s
Buffalo, New York
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Cincinnati, Ohio
Louisville, l\cntucky
Dal1as, T exa s
Seattle -Eve 1'ett, ','fa 8h.
Kansas City, rvlissouri
San Diego, Cali£.
Atlanta, Georgia
Indianapolis, Indiana
Miami, Florida
Denver, Colorado
New Orleans, Louisiana.
Portland, Oregon
Providence- Pawtuckett,
Rhode Is]and
Phoenix, Arizona
Tampa, Florida
Colulnbu s, Ohio
San Antonio, T exa s
Dayton, Ohio
Birrningharn, Alabam.a
Toledo, Ohio
Steubenv:ille- Weirton, Ohio/
. Wheeling, West Viq:!inia
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
. % chang e
Mfg. Prd.
(value
added)
-.16
-.60
-. 12
-.32
-.56
-.58
-.25
- 1. 94
'.;,.85
-1.39
-.75
-.83
-.26
-.50
-1.11
-'.84
-.49
-.32
-. 11
-.62
-.29
-.01
-.14
-.93
-. 14
-.30
-.28
-.65
-.24
-.37
-.41
-.44
-.55
-.22
-2.21
-. 94
-6.41
B~4
% change
Mfg. In-
vest-
rnent
-6.79
- 9.57
-3.94
-5.24
-6.43
-18.23
-5.30
-20.46
-13.26
-20.84
-9.58
-11.75
-6.23
-4.79
-1.11
-14.90
- 8. 11
-4.52
-2.01
-8.37'
-7.57
-1.01
-3.33.
-17.42
- 1. 88
-3.74
-3.82
-14.60
-4.50
-2.50
- 5. 01
-6.24
-5.93
-3.55
-38.75
- 11. 77
-19.39
Reg.
Per-
sonal
Inc.
-. 05
-.34
-.04
-. 16
-.37
-. 10
-.09
-. 97
-.43
-. 16
-.29
-.37
-. 15
-. 21
-.67
.' I
-. 00
-.34
-.38
.04
-.2.2
-. 13
-.001
-.07
-.49
-.02
"-. 14
:'.07
-. 21
-. 11
-. 14
-.08
-. 13
9'.08
-.20
-1.21
-.60
i - 5.29
Reg. I
U nen>.- Local
lT1nt. G o\-t. I
IRate .Revenue I
- i
. 074 -. 04
.393 -.53
. 0 1 9 - . 04
.155 -.23
.468 -.48
. 042 -. 10
-.089\ -.12
.739 -1.41
.476 -.65
.251 -.18
.213 -.42
. 297 - . 43
. 176
. 079
.44
. 112
.433
" . 512
.062
. 155
.113
.00
.080
.43
.026
.218
. 029
. 120
. 098
. 155
. 117
.081
.089
. 230
. 826
. 539
.568
-. 18
-.28
-.64
, ,
-.00
-.44
-. 53
. 07
-.31
-.20
-.00
-. 10
-. 71
-. 03
-. 18
-. 10
-.27
-. 17
-. 16
-. 10
-.20
-. 13
-.29
- 1. 80
-.83
-4.74
-------
AQCR
Code
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
50
51
52
53
54
55
61
63
64
66
67
68
69
70.
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
80
81
AQCR
Chattanooga, Tenn.
l'vfemphis, Tennessee
Salt Lake City, Utah --
Oklahoma City, Oklahorna
On1aha, Nebraska
Honolulu, Hawaii
Beau111ont-Port Arthur-
Orange, Texas
Charlotte, N. C.
Portland, Maine
Albuquerque, N. M.
El Paso, Tej~as
Las Vegas, Nevada
Fargo-Moorhead, N. D. ,
l\1innesota
Boise, Idaho
Billing s, Montana
Sioux City, Iov..Ja
Allentown-B ethlehen1-
Easton, Pa.
Bakersfield, Calif.
Davenport-Rock Island-
Moline, Iowa, Illinois
Grand Rapids/Muskegon-
Muskegon Heights, Migh.
Greensboro, N. C.
Harrisburg, Pa.
JacksonvUle, Florida
I\"noxville, Tenn.
Nashville, Tenn.
Peoria, Illinois
Richmond, Virginia
Rochester, New York
Saginaw /Ba y City, Mich.
Sc ranton/Wilke s Bar re-
HazeTton, Pa.
Syracuse, New York -
Tulsa, Oklah0111a
Youngstowi1- '.\Tarren,
Ohio -.
Albany-Schenectady-
Troy, New York
% change
Mfg. Prd.
(value
added)
-.83
-.35
-.40
-.73
-.51
-.27
-2.69
-.38
-.41
-. 15
'-.06
-.20
- 1. 93
-. 71
-4.74
- L 91
-1.33
- 7.45
-.75
-.94
-.30
-1.44
- 1. 49
-. 94
-.42
-.99
-.68
-. 19
..1.10
-2.29
-1.09
-.96
-1. 86
-. 95
B.5
% change
Mfg. 1n-
ve st-
D:lent:
-9.10
-6.96
-3.98
- 10. 18
-8.35
-4.73
-14.24
-2.20
-4.43
-3.87
- 1. 88
-1.50
-19.21
-16.75
-36.80
-118.36
-8.97
-66.42
-4.94
-8.83
-5.33
-24. 03
-14.66
-13.34
-4.55
- 7.40
-6.76
-2.50
-2.53
-49.01
-12.74
-20.29
-28.13
- 9.56
Reg.
Per-
sonal
Inc~
-.60
-, 13
-.11
-.17
-.28
-.03
-3.52
-. 18
-.20
-.01
-. 01
-.02
-.27
.05
- 1. 43
-.33
-.67
-.66
-.46
-.48
-.21
-.49
-.25
-.41
-.13
-.55
-.22
-. 18
-.62
- 1. 08
-.52
-.24
-1. 19
-.34
-~
Reg. I
Uncm - i Local
J11nt. !G ovt.
Rate IRevenue
.331 -.72
.071 -.16
.131 -.13
. 180 -. 24
.398 -.38
. 009 -. 06
'.672
.25
.-285
-.008
.006
.013
.428
-.007
.441
.260
.541
. 159
.322
.310
. 144
.430
.25
.371
.095
.397
.179
.152
.644
1. 248
.506
. 21
.754
.326
3.56
-.27
-.38
-. 01
-. 01
-.02
-.25
.07
1. 63
-.45
1. 08
-.45
-. 61
-.48
-.28
-. 70
-.40
-.56
-. 18
-.85
-.38
-. 19
-.74
1. 93
-.46
-.40
1. 84
-.37
-------
% change (tio change Reg. Reg. I I
t
Mfg. Prd. Mfg. 1n- Per- Unen,-! Local i
AQCR (value vest- s ona] n1.nt. !Govt. i
,
Code ,AQCR ,added) n,e nt . Inc. R2.te ! Revenue:
82 B ingbanl.ton, New York -.63 -10.28 -.39 .427 -.31
83 Charle ston, S. C. - 1. 66 -9.84 -.25 .256 -.40 I
J
84 Char1e ston, W. Va. -. 92 -7.00 - 1. 03 .649 -1. 58 i
85 Des Moines, Iowa -1.51 -19.77 -.63 -'4 -. 80 !
. :>0" i
86 F re sno, Calif. -1.32 -12.04 -.26 .379 -. 14 i
87 Fort 'Wayne, Indiana -.61 - 11. 08 -.26 -. 158 -.44 !
!
88 Jac leson, IvIis si ssippi - 1. 28 -17.68 -.29 .265 I -.34
89 Johnstown, Pa. -1.12 -7.95 -.52 -'0 -.68 I
. :>0, I
90 Lancaster, Pa. -. 90 -15.32 -.60 .406 - 1. 00 I
91 Mobile, Alabam.a -1. 32 -14.87 -.39 .327 -. 50. I
I
I
92 Nor £011<:- PortsDl.outh /New- I
I
j
port New s-IIanl.pton, -1.21 -17.25 -. 19 .203 I
Va. -.24 I
i
93 Raleigh/Durham, N. C. - 1. 04 -8.86 -.29 . 512 -.39 I
I
94 Reading, Pa. - 1. 74 -29.80 -.85 .589 -.39 I
I
95 Rockford, Illinois -.63 -7.92 -.41 . 202 -. 66 I
96 Sac ra1ne nto, Cali[ -=.61 -8.79 -. 12 . 102 -.09 !
97 . South Bend, Indiana -.60 -6.66 -.40 .469 -.52 i
I Utica-Rornc, New Yorl'Z i
98 -1.10 -21. 05 -.67 . 654 ~.62 \
I I !
199 I Wichita, Kansas -.29 - 13. 07 I -. 16 . 130 -. 19 i
100 ! 'ork -.46 -5.94 -.27 .243 ! I
a I -
.)
, P .
. 28
B.6
-------
Strategy 3
. Three Year Implern.entation 1973-1975 With
G ove rnment Financial Assistance
Benefits = $10. 0 Billion
% change % change Reg, Reg.
Mfg. Prd. Mfg. In- Per- U nern- Local
AQCR, (value ve s t - sonal n1nt. Govt.
Code AQCR added) 111 e n t Inc. Rate R eve nue
1 New York, New York - .06 --3.56 - .04 .086 - .03
2 Chicago, Illinois - ,34 - 5.37 - . 18 . 193 - .29
3 Los Angeles, Calif. - ,03 - 2.06 - . 01 .005 - . 01
4 Philadelphia, Pa. - . 17 - 2.79 - .08 .080 - . 12
5 Detroit, Michigan - . 36 -. 3.60 - .22 .239 - .29
6 San Francisco, Calif. - .30 - 8.59 - ,06 . 051 ;; .06
.06 .04 - .04
7 Boston, Ma s s.. - - 2.50 - . 047 ,..
8 Pittsburgh, Pa. -1,45 -10.24 - .68 . .450 - .99
9 St. Louis, 1\11is souri - .49 - 7.17 - .24 .243 - .37
10 Washington, D. C. - .55 - 8.67 - .06 .098 - .08
11 Cleveland, Ohio - .50 - 5.08 - . 19 I . 126 - . 27
12 Baltirnore, :Mary1and - .58 - 6.08 - .24 .189 - .28
14 Minneapolis -St. Paul, - .06 - 3. 03 - .03 ,014 - .03
1\1innesota - .06 - 3.03 - .03 ,014 - ,03
15 I-lonston, Texas - .22 - 2.39 - . 13 . .076 - . 18
16 B nHalo, New York - . 70 - 6.26 - .44 .321 - .42
-
17 1\1ilwaukee, Wisconsin - .44 - 7.02 - .34 . 371 - ,34
18 Cincinnati, Ohio - .22 - 4.60 - . 16 . .212 - . 21
19 Louisville, I\"cntuc1cy - . 17 - 3. 01 - , 1,~ ..235 - .25
20 Dallas, T exa s - .04 - .97 - ,03 .031 - .05
21 Seattle -Eve rett, Wash. - .26 - 4.07 - ,09. .072 - . 13
22 Kansas City, Mis soud - . 13 - 4.02 - ,04 . .028 - . 06
23 San Diego, Calif. + .04 - .50 +'.03 -.033 + .03
24 Atlanta, Georgia - .04 - L 99 - . 14 .146 - .20
25 Indianapolis, Indiana - .44 - 8. 07 - .24 .227 - ,34
26 Mia1'n.i, Florida - .02 - .95 + .00 -. 016 + .00
27 Denver, Colorado - . 14 - 2.70 - .06 .088 . 08
-
'28 New Orleans, Louisiana - . 12 - 1. 98 - . 03 .015 ::: .05
29 Portland, 0 regon - .26 - 6.91 - . 04 -.079 - . 05
30 Providence- Pawtuckett,
Rhode Island - . 16 - 2.56 - .07 .623 - . 11
31 Phoenix, Arizona - . 11 - .57 - : 06 . 092 - .06
32 Tan~pa, Florida - .25 - 3.47 - .04 .038 - .05
33 Coltunbus, Ohio - . 18 - 2:99 - .06 .047 - .09
34 San Antonio, T exa s - .2.6 - 2.59 - . 04 .047 - .07
35 Dayton, Ohio - . 10 - 1. 90 - . 09 . 106 - , 13
36 B i rn~ingharn, Alabama -2.14 -18.66 - .93 .570 - L 38
37 Toledo, Ohio - . 51 - 6.03 - . 31 .253 - .43
38 Steubenville- Weirton, Ohio/ .32
. Wheeling, West Virginia - - 10. 13 -2.60 .699 -2.33
B.7
-------
---- -----
r .--.---...---- -.-. --'.- - ..'----.--"_.
% change % change Reg. Reg. I
Mfg. Prd. Mfg. In- Per- Unern-ILocal
AQCR (value ve st - sonal rnnt. G ovt.
Code AQCR added) rnent Inc. Rate IRevenue
39 Chattanooga. Tenn. .39 I 4.46 .27 ! . 152 .32
- - - -
~O Men1phis, Tennessee - . 10 - 3.41 - .04 .028 - . 05
41 Salt Lake City, Utah .. - - . 12 - 1. 27 - .06 .085 - .07
42 Oklahoma City. Oklahoma - .27 - 2.84 - .08 . 106 - . 11
43 Onlaha, Nebraska - . 13 - 3. 10 - . 10 . 198 - . 14
44 Honolulu, Hawaii - . 10 - 2.72 - . 01 . 0.14. - .03
45 '. Beaunlont-Port Arthur-
Orange, Texas -1.41 - 6,85 -1.81 . 367. :.1.83
46 Charlotte, N. C. - . 10 - .66 - .04 . Ll3 - .06
47 Portland. Maine - - . 19 - 1. 60 +1.80 -: 1. 567 +3.31
48 Albuquerque, N. M. - .07 - 1. 92 - . 01 .061 - . 01
50 E1 Paso, T exa s + .03 - .72 - .02 ..018 - .03
51 Las Vegas, Nevada - . 10 - . 74 - .02 .038 - .02
52 Fargo - Moorhead, N.D.,
l-.1inne sota - .88 - 5.47 - . 18 .308 - . 17
53 Boise, Idaho - . 18 - 3.44 - .07 . 120 - . 10
54 Billings', M:ontana - 1. 94 -13.40 - .62 .746 - . 71
55 Sioux City, Iowa - : 76 -30.39 - . 15 . 145 - .20
61 A 11entown- B ethlehem.-
Ea ston, Fa. - .79 - 4.07 - .42 .350 I - .67
63 Bakersfield, Calif. -3.52 -22.82 - .34 .614 - .23
64 Davenport-Rock Is1ano-
Moline, Iowa, Illinois - .46 - 2.05 - .29 .288 - .38
66 Grand Rapids/Muskegon-
Muskegon Heights, Migh. - .46 - 4.16 - .24 . 157 - .24
67 Greensboro, N. C. - . 12 - 2.71 - . 68 .043 - . 10
68 Harrisburg. Fa. - .63 - 8.02 - .26 .284 - . 38
69 Jacksonville, Florida - .69 - 5.91 - . 13 . 146 - .21
'70 Knoxville, Tenn. - .39 - 4.55 - .20 .224 - .27
71 Na shville, Tenn. - . 13 - 1. 93 - . 04 . 046 - .06
72 Peoria, Illinois - .48 - 3.28 - .29 . 236 - .44
73 R ichnlond, Virginia - . 28 - 2.84 - . 10 .098 - .17
74 Rochester, Nev,' York - . 01 - 1. 09 - . 02 .028 - .02
75 Saginaw /Ba y City, Mich. - . 53 - 1. 19 - .32 .347 - .40
76 Sc ranton/Wilke s Bar re -
Hazelton, Pa. - . 90 -12.38 - .49 . 179 - .88
77 Syracuse, New York - .49 - 4.98 - .26 .298 - .23
78 Tulsa, Oklahonla - .38 - 6.88 - . 11 . 121 - . 19
80 Youngsto\,\'n- \Vc:.rren,
Ohio -. - 1. 33 -12. 11 - .86 .549 - 1. 33
81 Albany-Schenectady-
Troy, New York - .44 - 4.47 - . 16 . 156 - . 17
,
B.8
-------
1- ....- - .0 --
% change % change Reg. Reg.
Mfg. Prd. Mfg. 1n- Per- Unern- Local
AQCR (value vest- sonal iTI nt.. Govt.
Code AQCR added) n1.ent. Inc. Rate Revenue
82 Binghamton, New York - .22 - 3.88 - . 16 .214 - . 13
83 Charle ston, S.C. - . 67 - 3. 34 - . 12 . 155 - .20
84 Charle ston, W. Va. - .46 - 3.27 - .04 -.002 - .06
85 Des Moines, Iowa - .73 - 8.50 - .30 ~. 282 - .38
86 Fresno, Calif. - .63 - 4.,66 - . 13 .225 - .07
87 Fort "\Vayne, Indiana - .29 - 5.03 .:: . . 13 . .087 - .22
88 Jackson, Mississippi - .59 - 7.02 - .14 . 146 - . 17
89 J ohnsto\'\ln, Pa. - .42 - 2.20 - .24 .348 - .32
,90 Lancaster, Pa. - .37 - 5.91 - .28 .245 - .47
91 Mobile, A labaiTIa - .45 - 5.72 - .. 19 . 187 - .25
92 Nor folk- Port snl.outh/New-
port New s-Harnpton, Va. - .56 - 6.41 - . 10 . 136 - . 13
93 Raleigh/Durham, N.C. - .44 - .3. 04 - . 14 .312 - . 19
94 Reading, Pa. - .93 - 1.2. 16. - .48 .360 - .78
95 Rockfor'd, Illinois - .27 - 3.27 - . 19 .118 - . 31
96 Sacramento, Calif - ~29 - 3.85 - .06 .063 - . 05
97 South Bend, Iadiana - .26 - 2.48 - . 19 .264 - .25 I
98 Utica..Rome, New York - .60 - 8.91 1- .38 .398 - .35 I
99 Wichita, Kansas . - . 05 - 5.59 1- .04 .066 - . 05 I
I . 18 2.64 J- . 12 . 138 . 12
100 J York, Pa. - - -
'------ '
B.9
-------
Strategy 4
Five Year Extended Implementation
With Government Assistance
Benefit = $10.0 Billion
1973-77
. ill
..
% change % change Reg. Reg.
. - F ".. Mfg. Prd. Mfg. In- Per- Unem- Local
...
AQCR (value vest- sonal n1. n t. Govt.
Code I AQCR added) rnent Inc. Rate R eve nue
1 I New York, New York ...09 -2.74 ~,' 04 .081 .-.03
2 Chicago, Illinois -.24 -3.69 -. 14 . 158 -. 21
3 Los Angeles, Calif. -.04 -1.57 -.02 .010 -.02
4 Philadelphia, Pa. -.13 -2.08 -.06 .060 -.09
5 Detroit, Michigan -.24 -2.56 -. 16 . 192 -.20
6 San Francisco, Calif. -.24 -6.59 -.05 .027 -.05
7 Boston, Mas s: -.09 -2.09 -.03 - .037 -.05
8 Pittsburgh, Pa. -.87 -7.49 -.41 .305 -.60
9 St. Louis, Jvlis souri -.35 -4.98 -.20 .222 -. 31
10 Washington, D. C. -.56 -7.41 -.07 . 107 -.08
11 Cleveland, Ohio -.34 -3.74 -. 11 .093 -. 15
12 Baltimore, Maryland -.36 -4.51 -. 15 .118 -.17
14 Minneapolis -St. Paul,
Minnesota -. 10 -2.42 -.06 .075 -.08
15 I-Iou stan, Texas -.20 -1.89 -.08 .032 -. 11
16 Buffalo, New York -.45 -4.95 -.25 . 116 -.24
17 Milwaukee, vVis consin -.35 -5.55 -.27 .290 -.27
18 Cincinnati, Ohio -. 19 -3.14 -. 13 . 171 -.17
19 Louisville, Kentucky -. 12 -1.79 -.14 . 194 -. 19
20 Dallas, Texas -.07 - .83 +.03 -.001 +.06
21 Seattle-Everett, Wash. -.24 -3.-23 -.09 .065 -. 12
22 Kansas City, Missouri -. 11 -2.94 -. 14 . 129 -. 21
23 San Diego, Calif. +.01 - .40 +. 00 -.001 +.00
24 Atlanta, Georgia -.05 -1.33 -.02 .032 -.04
25 Indianapolis, Indiana -.37 - 6: 34 -.20 . 171 -.28
26 Mian1.i, Florida +.03 -.70 +.03 -.099 +. 05
27 Denver, Co] orado -. 15 -1.53 -.09 . 159 -. 11
'28 New Orleans, Louisiana -.11 - 1. 53 -.03 .012 -.04
29 Portland, Oregon -.27 -5.42 -.09 .058 -. 12
30 Providence - Pawtuckett,
Rhode Island -. 10 - 1. 82 -.05 .045 -.08
31 Phoenix, Arizona -. 15 -1.01 -.06 .062 -.07
32 T an1.pa, Florida -.08 -1.89 +.00 -.033 +.00
33 Colurnbus, Ohio -. 18 -2.45 -.05 .036 -.08
34 San Antonio, T exa s -.22 -2.32 -.03 . 030 -.05
35 Dayton, Ohio -.09 - 1. 43 -.09 . 111 -. 13
36 B irminghall.l., Alabama -1.21 -12.78 -.54 .364 -.80
37 Toledo, Ohio -.38 -4.45 -.24 .212 -.33
38 Steubenville- Weirtol1, Ohio/
. Wheeling, West Vin!:inia -2.57 -7.06 - 2. 13 .632 -1.91
B.I0
-------
AQCR
Code
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
50
51
52
53
54
55
61
63
64
66
67
68
69
'70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
80
81
,,,.''''''-~'-...,-~.~-.~'--.;;;".-."~~.. . ~."-
AQCE.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Ivlernphis, Tennessee
Salt Lake City, Utah- --
Oldahoma City, 01dahom.a
ODlaha, Nebraska
Honolulu, Hawaii
Beaumont-Port Arthur-
Orange, Texas
Charlotte, N. C.
Portland, Maine
Albuquerque, N. M.
El Paso, Texas
Las Vegas, Nevada
Fargo-Moorhead, N. D. ,
Minne sota
Boise, Idaho
Billings, Montana
Sioux City, Iowa
A llcntown-B eth] ehcrn-
I Easton, Fa.
I Bakersfield, Calif.
Davenport-Rock Island-
Moline, Iowa, Illinois
Grand Rapids/Mnskegon-
Muskegon Heights, Migh.
Greensboro, N. C.
Harrisburg, Pa.
Jacksonville, Florida
Knoxville, Tenn.
Nashville, Tenn..
Peoria, Illinois
Richmond, Virginia
Rochester, New York
Saginaw IBay City I Mich.
Sc ranton/Wilke s Bar re-
HazeTton, Pa.
Syracuse, New York
Tulsa, Ok1ahoDIa
Young stown- Vva rren,
Ohio -
Albany-Schenectady-
Troy, New York
----- . --. ----~ -----,-
T,',- .<'r.._._------.O..",- - . ---.--.--.------. -- -~-_._,_.-
% change
Mfg. Prd.
(value
added)
-.33
-.13
-. 16
-.30
-. 19
-.13
- 1. 08
-. 15
. -. 17
-.07
-.01
-.08
-.78
-.28
- 1. 85
-.73
-.57
-2.95
-.33
-.38
-. 14
-.59
-. 61
-.38
-. 16
-.41
-.27
-.05
-.44
-.93
-.44
-.39
-.83
-.33
B. 11
% change
Mfg. In-
ve st-
rnent
-3.50
-2.70
-1.59
-3.87
-3.20
-1.89
-5.26
- .89
-1. 76
-1. 55
- ..76
-. 61
-6.88
-6.07
-12.13
-25.66
- 3. 51
-19.51
- 1. 99
-3.42
-2.14
-8.44
-5.49
-5.02
-1. 80
-2.90
-2.66
- .99
- 1. 02
-1.15
-4.83
-7.29
- 9. 96
-3.67
Reg.
Per-
sonal
Inc~
-.24
-.05
-.05
-.07
-. 10
-.02
+.43
-.09
--.13
-.06
-.02
-.02
-. 11
-. 10
-.45
-. 10
-.29
-.26
-.20
-. 21
-. 11
-.20
-. 10
-. 16
-.05
-.23
-.09
-.04
-.24
-.44
-.21
-. 10
-.53
-. 10
Reg. I
Unem- iLoca1
DInt. IGovt.
Rate Revenue
. 131
.028
.059
.077
. 148
.037
.439
. III
.163
.003
.013
.016
.172
. 107
.465
.063
.228
.462
. 137
.- 135
.096
. 178
. 103
. 144
.-034
. 162
.073
.020
.245
.509
.207
.086
.327
. 051
-.20
-.06
-.06
-. 10
-. 14
-.05
+.43
-. 13
-.25
-.01
-.02
-.01
-. 10
"'
-. 13
-. 51
-. 13
-.46
-. 18
-.26
-. 21
-. 15
-.29
-.17
-. 21
-.06
-.35
-. 15
-.04
-. 31
-.78
-. 19
-. 16
-. 81
. -. 10
-------
1-- --
% change % change Reg. Reg.
Mfg. Prd. Mfg. 1n- Per- Unern- Local
AQCR (value vest- s onal mnt. Govt.
Code AQCR added) Dl.Cnt Inc. Rate Revenue
82 Bingbarnton, New York -.25 -3.96 -. 15 .170 -. 12
83 Charleston, S. C. -.67 -3.79 -.06 .076 -. 10
84 Charleston, W. Va. -.38 -2.75 -.37 .233 '::.57
85 Des Moines, Iowa -.61 -7.25 -.26 . 235 -.33
86 Fresno, Calif. -.53 -4.55 -. 12 . 157 -.06
87 Fort Wayne, Indiana -.25 14. 21 -. 10 -.062 -. 18
88 Jackson, Mississippi -. 51 -6.50 -. 12 . 103 -. 14
89 Johnsto\vn, Po.. '-.46 -3.09 -. 19 .214 -.25
fJO Lancaster, Po.. -.37 -5.69 -.22 . 161 -.37
91 Mobile, A labanl.a -.52 -5.53 -. 15 . 125 -. 19,
92 Nor £olk- Portsmouth/New-
port New s-I-Ianl.pton, Va. -.49 -6.35 -.07 .075 -.09
93 Raleigh/Durham, N. C. -.41 -3.42 -.11 .178 -. 14
94 Reading, Pa. -.72 -10.14 -.36 .244 -.58
95 Rockford, Illinois -.26 -3.08 -. 16 .082 -.27
96 Sacrarnento, Calif .::.25 -3.40 -.05 .046 -.04
97 South Bend, Indiana -.24 -2.62 -. 16 . 191 -.21
98 Utica...Rom.e, New York I -.46 -7.62 -.28 .275 -.26
99 Wichii:a, E'ansas I -. 10 -4.86 -.08 .070 -.09
100 I York, Pa. -. 18 , -2.34 I -.11 . 104 I -. 11
B.12
-------
..x., -~":;"~, '..~ ,-,,;. ,,"..-.,,0.:,,.,.,. ",. ~.,....."", ,-'-,-'-..n ~
Strategy 5 . .
Three ,Year Straight Implementation 1973-1975
Without G ove rnme nt Finane ial Assistance
Be\'lefit .=,' 0/,15.0 Billion
. % change % change Reg. Reg.
.Mfg. Prd. Mfg,. In- Per- Unem- Loca]
AQCR (value ve s t - so na 1 mnt. G ovt.
Code AQCR added) ment Inc. Rate Revenue
1 New York, New York + . 19 - 8.59 + . 01 .067 + . 01
2 Chicago, Illinois - .56 -13.75 - .33 .409 - . 51
3 Los Angeles, Calif., + . 12 - 4.90 + .04 -. 017 + .04
4 Philadelphia, Pa. - . 11 - 6.70 - .08 . 138 - . 12
5 Detroit, Michigan - .60 - 8.89 - .39 .479 - .50
6 San Francisco, Calif. - .34 -23.15 -. .06 .048 - .06
7 Boston, Mass. +. . 05 - 6.08 - .02 .067 - .02
8 Pittsburgh, Pa. - 3.01 -27.79 -1.47 1. 052 - 2. 15
9 St. Louis, Mis souri - .83 -18.85 - .49 .570 - .76
10 Washington, D. C. -1.27 -24.'04 - .11 .216 - .13
11 Cleveland, Ohio - .92 -12.85 - .37 .302 - .54
12 Baltimore, Maryland - 1. 02 -15.49 - .44 .366 - . 51
14 Minneapolis-St. Paul,
Minne s ota - .02 - 7.52. - .08 .190 - . 10
15 Houston, Texas - .,23 - 5.82 - . 12 .062 - . 16
16 Buffalo, New York -1. 32 -16.11 - .84 .670 - . 81
17 Milwaukee, Wisconsin - .89 -18.63 - .72 .850 - .72
18 Cincinnati, Ohio - .25 - 11. 64 - .23 .410 - .30
19 Louisville, l{entucky - .22 - 7.45 - .46 .661 - .66
20 Dallas, T exa s +'.02 - 2.28 - .01 .033 - . 01
21 Seattle-Everett, Wash. - .42 - 1 O. 42 - . 15 .116 - .21
22 Kansas City, Mis souri - .08 - 9.90 - .08 .098 - . 11
23 San Diego, Calif. + .23 - 1. 10 + .03 -. 019 + .03
24 Atlanta, Georgia + . 14 - 4.74. - .01 .069 - . 01
25 Indianapolis, Indiana - .84 -21. 96 - .49 .528 - . 71
26 Miami, Florida + .02 - 2.29 - .00 .015 - .00
27 Denver, Colorado - .11 - 6.61 - .08 . 178 - . 10
28 New Orleans, Louisiana + .00 - 4.70 + .00 .001 + .00
29 Portland, Oregon - .52 -18.49 - . 17 . 105 - .22
30 Providence - Pawtuckett,
Rhode Island - . 13 - 6. 10 - .06 .062 - . 10
31 Phoenix, Arizona - . 10 - 1. 30 - .09 .200 - . 10
32 Tampa, Florida - .63 - 8. 94 - . 11 .115 - . 13
33 Columbus, Ohio - ~20 - 7.46 - .07 .071 - .11
34 San Antonio, Texas - .63 - 6.56 - . 10 . 112 - . 16
35 Dayton, Ohio - .08 - 4.57 - .11 .207 - . 16
36 Birmingham, Alabama -4.52 -58.20 -1. 96 1.222 -2.91
37 Toledo, Ohio - .99 - 15. 79 - .61 .542 - .86
38 ,Steubenville- Weirton, Ohio/
Wheeling, West Virginia -8.63 -28.43 -6.38 1. 729 - 5. 71
B.13
-------
% change % change Reg. Reg.
Mfg. Prd. Mfg. In- Per- Unem- Local
AQCR (value ve st - sonal mnt. Govt.
Code AQCR added) ment Inc. Rate Revenue
39 Chattanooga, Tenn. - .72 - 11. 46 - .52 .329 - .63
40 Memphis, T enne s see + .02 - 8.44 + .00 .012 + .00
41 Salt Lake City, Utah ;;; . 17 - 3.06 - .07 . 160 - .09
42 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma - .66 - 7.20 - . 19 .263 - .27
43 Omaha, Nebraska - . 13 - 7.69 - .20 .501 - .27
44 Honolulu, Hawaii + .00 - 6.72 - .01 . '022 - . 01
45 Beaumont-Port Arthur-
Orange, Texas -3.50 -18.61 -4.53 .899 -4.60
46 Charlotte, N. C. - .03 - 1. 52 - .11 .304 - . 16
47 Portland, Maine - .43 - 3.95 - .26 .427 - .46
48 Albuquerque, N. M. + .07 - 4.55 + . 01 .000 + . 0]
50 El Paso, T exa s + .20 - 1. 70 + .04 -.034 + .06
51 Las Vegas, Nevada + .07 - 1. 69 + .06 -.067 + .06
52 Fargo-Moorhead, N. D.,
Minne s ota - 2. 17 - 14.35 - .42 .742 - .40
53 Boise, Idaho - . 31 - 8.60 - .09 . 211 - . 1]
54 Billings, Montana -4.39 -38.70 -1. 22 1. 220 -1.39
55 Sioux City, Iowa -1.37 -130.30 - .37 .409 - . 51
61 Allentown-B eth1ehem.-
Ea ston, Pa. -1.55 - 10. 08 - .84 .753 -1.35
63 -8.89 -76.14 .82 1. 500 i .57
Bakersfield, Calif. - -
64 Davenport-Rock Is1and-
Moline, Iowa, Illinois - .88 -4.86 - .61 .552 - .80
66 Grand Rapids/Muskegon-
Muskegon Heights, Migh. -1.15 - 10; 72 - .59 .397 - .60
67 Greensboro, N. C. - .23 - 6.76 - . 15 .100 - .20
68 Harrisburg, Pa. -1. 52 -21.71 - .60 .644 - .85
69 Jacksonville, Florida - 1. 69 -15.53 - . 31 .345 - .50
70 Knoxville, Tenn. - . 95~ -11.71 - . 51 .553 - .69
71 Na shvil1e, Tenn. - . 12 - 4.68 - .06 .090 - .08
72 Peoria, Illinois - .92 - 8. 16 - .57 .524 - .88
73 Richmond, Virginia - .48 - 6.99 - . 18 .210 - . 31
74 Rochester, Ne\'J York + . 14 - 2.56 + .05 .041 + .05
, '75 '-' "Saginaw/Bay City, Mich. -1. 29 2.94 .77 .842 .97
- - -
76 Scranton/Wilkes Barre- .
Hazelton, Pa. -2.21 -35.07 -1. 23 1. 780 -2.20
77 Syracuse, New York - .91 -12.60 - .55 .718 - .49
78 Tulsa, Oklahoma - .96 -18.40 - .28 .309 - .47
80 Young stown- Warren,
Ohio - -2.75 -32.88 -1:79 1. 178 -2.76
81 Albany-Schenectady-
.80 - 11. 25 . 31 . .342' " .34
Troy, New York - - -
B.14
-------
I .
--:-:~.-'.~~...",-..
. ~,--
% change % change Reg. Reg.
Mfg. Prd. Mfg. In- Per- Unem- Local
AQCR (value vest- sonal mnt. G ovt.
Code AQCR added) ment Inc. Rate Revenue
82 Bingharn.ton, New York - .39 - 9. 75 - .35 .550 - .28
83 Char1e ston, S. C. -1. 65 - 8.47 - . 31 .384 - .49
84 Char1e ston, W. Va. -1.11 - 8. 31 - .90 .559 - 1. 38
85 Des Moines, Iowa -1.80 -23.05 - .78 . 738 -1. 00
86 Fresno, Calif. - 1. 54 - 12. 08 - .35 .574 - . 18
87 Fort Wayne, Indiana - .72 -13.18 - .32 .211 - .55
88 Jackson, Mississippi -1.47 -18.74 - .37 .384 - .43
89 Johnstown, Fa. - 1. 05 - 5.52 - . 61 .902 - .80
90 Lancaster, Pa. - .72 . 15. 36 - .58 .556 - .96
91 Mobile, Ala barna - .78 -14.74 - .27 .332 - .36-
92 Nor fo1k- Portsmouth/New-
port New s-Hampton, Va. -1.; 32 -16.86 - .22 . .283 - .28
93 Raleigh/Durham, N.C. - 1. 07 -7.67 - .35 .758 - .46
94 Reading, Pa. '- 1. 96 -34.92 -1.01 .795 -1. 66
95 Rockford, Illinois - .50 -8.20 - .39 ;272 - .62
96 Sacramento, Calif - .72 - 9. 91 '- . 16 . 161 - . 12
97 South Bend, Indiana - .55 - 6. 15 - .44 .638 - .56
98 Utica-Rom.e, New York -1.22 -23.92 - .80 .911 - .75
99 Wichita, Kansas + . 13 -14.26 + .00 . 1 J. 5 + .00
100 . York, Pa. - .21 - 6.48 - .20 .299 - .20
B.15
-------
Strategy 6 .
.r lve Year Extended Implementation
Government Financial Assistance
Be!1efit.:= $15.0 Billion
1973-1975 With
% change % change Reg. Reg.
Mfg. Prd. Mfg.. In- Per- U nem - Local
.." ~ .- ... . - ".. '-,-2-
AQCR (value vest- so na 1 ni n t. Govt.
Code AQCR added) ment Inc. Rate Revenue
1 New York, New York + . 01 - 2.58 - . 01 .041 - . 01
2 Chicago, Illinois - . 18 - 3.63 - . 11, .148 - . 17
3 Los Angeles, Calif. + .01 - 1. 50 + .01 -.007 + .01
4 Philadelphia, Pa. - .05 - 2.00 - .02 .024 - .03
5 Detroit, Michigan - .19 - 2.52 - . 15 .204 - .20
6 San Francisco, Calif. - . 15 - 6.45 - .03 .015 - .03
7 Boston, Mass. - .02 - 2.01 - .00 .033 - .00
8 Pittsburgh, Pa. - .84 - 7.48 - .40 . 301 - .58
9 St. Louis, Missouri - .27 - 4.89 - . 17 .209 - .26
10 Washington, D. C. - .50 - 7.36 - .06 . 100 - .07
11 Cleveland, Ohio - .28 - 3.69 - .11 .091 - . 15
12 Baltimore, Maryland - . 31 - 4.47 - .14 . 117 - . 16
14 Minneapolis -St. Paul,
Minne s ota - .04 - 2.35 - .03 .053 - .04
15 Houston, Texas - . 12 - 1.84 - .09 ..058 - . 12
16 Buffalo, New York - .42 - 4.93 - .26 . 190 - .25
17 Milwaukee, Wisconsin - .30 - 5. 51 - .24 .276 - .24
18 Cincinnati, Ohio - . 11 - 3.06 -. .09 . 147 - . 11
19 Louisville, Kentucky - .07 - 1. 74 - . 18 .029 - .08
20 Dallas, T exa s - .02 - ..79 - . 01 . 012 - .02
21 Seattle -Eve rett, Wash. - . 18 - 3.21 - .07 .052 . - .09
22 Kansas City, Mis souri - .05 - 2.84 .- .06 .063 - .09
23 San Diego, Calif. + .04 - . . 37 + .02 -. 019 + .02
24 Atlanta, Georgia + .02 - 1. 27. - .07 .079 - . 11
25 Indianapolis, Indiana - . 31 - 6.28 - . 17 . 162 - .25
26 Miami, Flor ida - .02 - .74 - .09 .095 - . 12
27 Denver, Colorado - .02 - 1.43 - .04 .083 - .05
28 New Orleans, Louisiana - .04 - 1. 47 - . 01 .003 - . 01
29 Portland, Oregon - .20 , - 5.36 - .07 .041 - .09
30 Providence - Pawtuckett,
Rhode Island + .01 - 1.70 + .04 -. 135 + .07
31 Phoenix, Arizona - . 12 - . 99 - .05 .064 - ..06
32 Tampa, Florida - .08 - 1. 89 + .00 -.033 + .00
33 Columbus, Ohio - .11 - 2.41 - .04 .030 - .06
34 San Antonio, T exa s . . - .22 - 2.32 - . 03 .030 .05
-
35 Dayton, Ohio - - .05 - 1. 38 - .05 .080 - .08
36 Birmingham, Alabama -1.18 -12.77 - .53 .358 - .78
37 Toledo, Ohio - . 32 - 4.39 - .21 .200 - .29
38 Steubenville- Weirton, Ohio!
Wheeling, West Virginia -2.56 - 7.06 -2. 12 .629 -1. 90
B.16
-------
0/0 change % change Reg. Reg.
Mfg. prd. Mfg. In- Per- Unem- Local
AQCR (value vest- sonal mnt. Govt.
Code AQCR added) ment Inc. Rate Revenue
39 Chattanooga, Tenn. - .27 - 3.46 - . 19 . 109 - .23
40 Memphis, Tennessee - . 05 - 2.61 - .02 .009 - .02
41 Salt Lake City, Utah - . 12 - 1. 56 - .04 .051 - .05
42 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma - .30 - 3.87 - .07 .077 - . 10
43 Omaha, Nebraska - . 12 - 3. 12 - .08 . 144 - . 11
44 Honolulu, Hawaii - .04 - 1. 82 - . 01 . 013 - .02
45 Beaumont-Port Arthur-
Orange, T e xa s -1. 08 - 5.26 + .43 -.439 + .43
46 Charlotte, N. C. - .09 - .86 - .05 .856 - .08
47 Portland, Maine - '. 17 - 1. 76 - . 13 . 163 - .25
48 Albuquerque, N. M. - .02 - 1. 50 - .00 .002 - .00
50 £1 Paso, T exa s + .04 - .72 + . 01 -.005 + .01
51 Las Vegas, Nevada - .03 - .58 + . 00 -. 001 + .00
52 Fargo-Moorhead, N.D.,
Minne s ota - .78 - 6.88 - . 11 . 172 - . 10
53 Boise, Idaho - .24 - 6. 01 - .1.1 . 120 - . 15
54 Billing s, Montana -1. 70 - 11. 96 - .40 .447 - .46
55 Sioux City, Iowa - .61 -25.40 - .08 .084 - .11
61 Allentown-B ethlehem-
Easton, Pa. - .53 - 3.49 - .26 . 215 - .42
63 Bakersfield, Calif. .-2.95 -19.51 - .26 .462 - . 18
64 Davenport-Rock Island-
Moline, Iowa, Illinois - .30 - 1. 98 - . 18 . 130 - .24
66 Grand Rapids/Muskegon-
Muskegon Heights, Migh. - .38 - 3.42 - .21 . 135 - .21
67 Greensboro, N. C. - . 12 - 2.12 - .03 .095 - . 14
68 Harrisburg, Pa. - . 12 - 8.44 - .20 . 178 - .29
69 Jacksonville, Florida - .61 - 5.49 - . 10 . 103 - . 17
.70 Knoxville, Tenn. - .38 - 5. 02 - . 16 .144 - .21
71 Nashville, Tenn. - . 11 - 1. 76 - .03 . 029 - .04
72 Peoria, Illinois - .35 - 2.88 - .20 . 155 - .31
73 Richmond, Virginia - .22 - 2.62 - .07 .066 - . 12
74 Roche~ter, New York - .00 - .96 - . . 01 . 016 - . 01
75 Saginaw/Bay City, Mich. - .44 - 1. 02 - .24 .245 - . 31
76 Scranton/Wilkes Barre-
HazeTton, Pa. ,- .93 -15.15 - .44 .509 - .78
77 Syracuse, New York - .38 - 4.77 - . 19 . 196 - .17
78 Tulsa, Oklahoma - .39 - 7.29 - . 10 .086 - . 16
80 Youngstown- Warren,
Ohio - .81 - 9.96 - .52 .322 - '.80
-
81 Albany-Schenectady-.
---3.-~6-- . "
Troy, New York ---- ..-. -- --d--.-3-l- --.- ---.-1+ - -- --;-11-3.-- -- - . 12--
B.17
-------
0/0 change % change Reg. Reg.
Mfg. Prd. Mfg. In- Per- Unem- Local
AQCR (value ve st- sonal mnt. Govt.
Code AQCR added) lnent Inc. Rate Revenue,
82 Binghamton, New York - .20 - 3.91 - . 13 . 156 - . 10
83 Char1e ston, S. C. - .67 - 3.79 - .06 .076 - .10
84 Charle ston, W. Va. - . 38 - 2.75 - .37 .233 - .57
85 Des Moines, Iowa - .61 - 7.25 - .26 .235 - .33
86 F re sno, Calif. - .53 - 4.55 - . 12 . 157 - .06
87 Fort Wayne, Indiana - .25 - 4.21 - . 10 .062 - . 18
88 Jackson, Mississippi - . 51 - 6.50 - . 12 .103 - . 14
89 Johnstown, Pa. - .46 - 3.09 - . 19 .214 - .25
90 Lancaster, Pa. - .32 - 5..65 - .21 .154 - .35
91 Mobile, Alabama - .41 - 4.54 - . 12 . 106 - . 15
92 Nor £01k- Portsmouth/New-
port New s-Harnpton, Va. - .49 - 6.35 - .07 . .075 - .09
93 Raleigh/Durham., N.C. - .41 - 3.42 - .11 . 178 - .14
94 Reading, Pa. - .68 -10. 11 - .34 .254 - .56
95 Rockford, Illinois - ..22 - 3.06 - . 15 .082 - .24
96 Sacramento, Calif - .25 - 3.40 - .05 .046 - .04
97 South Bend, Indiana - .22 - 2.61 - . 16 . 189 - .20
98 Utica-Ronle, New York - .41 - 5.57 - .25 .247 - .23
99 Wichita, Kansas - .03 - 4.70 - .04 .045 - .04
100 York, Pa. - . 12 - 2.30 - .08 .074 - .08
. ..
~ ... - .
.----------.-------- ---...---- ..- ..-.-.-.-------..---- - '.
.----. ._u.
B.18
-------
APPENDIX C
REGIONS OF CONCENTRATION OF KEY
HIGH EMISSION INDUSTRIES
-------
--~ ..-----,,-... .
Regions With 1 % or More of National Production
of Primary Metal Industrie s >:'
AQCR
%
1 New Yo r k, N. Y.
2 Chicago, Ill.
3. Los Angele s, Cal.
4 Philadelphia, Pa.
5 Detroit, Mich.
8 Pittsburgh, Pa.
9 St. Louis, Mo.
11 Cleveland, Oh.
12 Baltimore, Md.
15 Houston, T x.
16 Buffalo, N. Y.
17 Milwaukee, Wis.
3Q Birmingham, AI.
38 Steubenville - Weir ton/Wheeling,
80 Youngstown - Warren, Oh.
Oh. /W. v.
1. 06
5. 17
2.31
2.93
4.16
8.59
1. 86
3.11
2.56
1. 12
2.30
1. 35
1. 78
2.09
2.50
>:< SIC 33, Primary Metal Industries, includes SIC IS 3321, Gray Iron
Foundrie s; 3323, Steel Foundrie s; 3331, Primary Copper; 3323, Pri-
mary Lead; 3333, Primary Zinc; 3334, Primary Aluminum; and 3341,
Secondary Nonferrous Metals. These are the codes under which Gray
Iron Foundries; Iron and Steel; Primary Copper, Lead, and Zinc; Pri-
mary Alum.inum; and Secondary Nonferro us Metals were classified.
C. 1
-------
~egions wi:h% or More of National Production of :>rimary Metal Industries
. }<521 i\" .'
. !ri I .
I~. .... I
l \ ~I
f 053 ~ ~
( / . / !
) . I
" ~ I
\ q~ I 041 I
o
.
N
031
...~
/' \
. S \ .
~~ !
. ( J
. ov. ~~
I. ~' ~4 1 . 'J/fj '-\:\
1/ O~., I '.4-
./.~ -....-."V I
, \
~~. .',~
. . . /2. \ 47 /
,52 Z~ ' "0/
; j ------ ./'~~ \ ( \/
~ . r 4 ~/ (S , 7 77a8~\ I i7' .
, . - ! I 75~J 0 9
'I O'-l4 17,' ~ '. 16, 8 i~_. \- .J
'\ . I 82 r '. 30 .
. r .') a €I; \ ~ 6 5' 7 I! :/,,;;
"-----'05" YeS ~ =J j -"-~ ~< 80 1 0 ~ ~Q\~/ 61
\ :> OS 5 ,J t.. c. °)-/0'9 7\3 ' 0; 8 6 8,-~ ) . 94
43 q J064 1\ 870\ 33 380Fi.~(./;j-~90
\--. t. 072 L; 358 0 /.. '7')-----:0';'\ 1...2, .
-"'" '" . IS -I' J' 10--<.,\,,/
022 '\ :J . ~\' PI') \)
:' 9~ f;19~.Y 7:D 092 .
099! '\ j / ------=~;
1 \_J ~--rb70 ->../.
- L \ /--_J 07 1~0 09 3 ,~!/
; ISO \ /...., '~~ ".-r--
I 042 \ 5-~O I ~ \ 7 yI
~~-J I \ 36 \ 024 ~ .
020 r \ I Q) . Y
\ } 08 S i a Ii, \
!......, , I . it
" L- \n \~rl
. .451 \r.l>/.-r-<-~~ b9~
034 15 0:0~", 28~
;/ ~ . 032
;':'-- \\ )
. / . \;~ 26~
\ \ D
." . ~~
--- ..../
048
027 I
i
I
I
I
!.
.-<
L
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
.'
-----
I
I
, I
-------
...c .~ ,"
.,;~~,.. "---,Q.f_.....,;,-,,-.'~' "-",...........-. -',..1--.---.,...-.--- -~ "-"-' ."..,....-----~..~---~-,.-.~--_.' ._'-'-~'- ----.. ,,,.:.~----.-~---=-=-:--------:---
Regions with 1 % or More of National Production
of Stone, Clay, and Glass Products >:,
AQCR
%
1 New York, N. Y.
2 Chicago, Ill.
3 Los Angeles, Ca.
4 Philadelphia
5 Detroit, Mich.
6 San Francisco, Ca.
8 Pittsburgh, Pa.
9 St. Louis, Mo.
12 Baltimore, Md.
15 Houston, T x.
16 Buffalo, N. Y.
37 Toledo, Oh.
81 Albany - Schenectady
- Troy, N. Y.
1. 90
3.29
2.88
2.23
2.31
1. 30
2.54
1. 71
1. 19
1. 04
1. 26
2.06
1. 10
>:< SIC 32, Stone, Clay, and Glass Products, includes SIC IS 3214,
Hydraulic Cen~ent, and 3274, Lime, under which cement and Lime
were classified.
C.3
-------
Regions wi:h I % or More of National :>roduetion of Stone, C .ay, anc Glas s,
'. :\.'
rT[-
/ \.
. .,,~ J
civ\-. ~r ~ .
, . 2/0 .
. . .V'- I
'"-'''
()
,p..
041 /
" I
~f--t
031
. --.- ~
IF. ~O' 74'. II
/ ~.~
. / .\> I
?roc ue :s
.
054
. .
. ,:'\. . . '. ..' . . J"\: '
\.~. ',,:' .'. . " .'
~~/./7 . \i17/
,52 h/~? \ \0 .,
. ! ~ '''''~.r---... \ I \{ '. .
< . ( i1i (f. \ - i/7 a 8 ~7 . .' '
! d-.l.4 ./ L 7 5~) 16.. ( 0 8'!L--.. \~i.~__.. \ . ~J . ,
\ "\ 1 7 I '\.) 82D--- ;- \ 30 .
I ~ d \06 ".. 70 ')-..l'~y
------. ',. . 9 ~_\ ) ...!-./ 1 80 1 0 :;? .> ~/ . 6 1 .
t(5:> . 02LcJ97\37 O. B 6~~ j '. 94
43 q 085 r:64 ! 870 . . OiQ(')__Q!\~
: .;0 \ \ 33 3 8 .i~,-~.:-- q>'ti ----90
\- \ 072 ~n 3K>. 9 / "1.2'.\ .J' .
-" " 2"'5 UlJ1. .r' .J -..:" ~ . .
022, ,.r' \' 9 I '(u
; 9 0.. "~19 ~ 730 cl92 . .
099; - ~ ~~: .
i \-J. ~O ~.'. '.
L 1.J..---' 71 70 093 pJ '. .
I . 780 I 2.. . .
I 042 \ ( 4 0 . 3 9 ~ .
~~) . / i 36 \ 024 ,\83
020~ I I 0' . '
.' \ > 088 i 91 ~ r-'
. '. C1,n~O
45!' \--'~---~~b9
034 15~",28~ .
:~ ~~ 32
(" '. '\'\" 26,
\ .~
. /
048
f
I
. I
027 [
i
i
I.
.. l'
I
I
I
I
. ,
"
-------
Regions with 1% or More of National Production
of Petroleum and Coal Products ':<
AQCR
%
2 Chicago, Ill.
3 Los Angeles, Ca.
4 Philadelphia, Pa.
5 Detroit, Mich.
6 San Francisco, Ca.
9 St. Louis, Mo.
15 Houston, T x.
37 Toledo, Oh.
45 Beaum.ont - Port Arthur
99 Wichita, Kansas
- Orange, Tx.
2.73
5.67
5.35
1. 26
4.24
3.59
10. 12
2.00
14.32
1. 54
~< SIC 29, Petroleum and Coal Products, include s SIC I s 2911, Petro-
leum Refining, and 2951, A sphalt Mixture s and Blocks, under which
Petroleum Refining and Storage and Asphalt Batching we re das sHied.
G.5
-------
Regions with 1 % or More 0: National Production of Petroleum anc Coal Products
.~~.......
/P9~ \ .. .
/ . . \ 054.
? .~
f . 053 I - I
( / . I
) , '. I
\ :. I
'. \8Q6'
6
0.
-0'
. c' 44 !
'0' - ,
/ '~'/ I ".
/ ,{> /
I
.
,"":"
048
027 (
i
I
I
!
l-
L-
J
I
I
I. :
r~/Z . ... 0/.~.
~52 I~~ \ (\9
~ . ( j{i (J t ~nas)W7'. .
) d'~ )' {", 75~~ "16 7 0 81I--..:~ .
1 '. '1 1~ \~) 6 ~4f 8 ¥i?'-'t:W 30
,---..! - ~ ~ ~- _h.~l 1 1 80 1 0 O(\;'=?~ ''-!-' 61
,,~:>:> . 85 ) 0201./-097>\3 (. Ud: $ 68fJYG4'; . 94
4.) q 0 b.64 1\ 870. 33 O;:~:.~,'Sf- -90
t~ \! 072 9 3\ffi03~.' '7')-"\-rJ;'\lZ,
5 t 18 1--: r 10-.:-\\(
. <. , (I
022 \ . ,-/' \" 9 / ') \)
4i"U 9 9 i~ 9 ~ V1J1 9 /\-2Y 7 3() ~92
W I \f ~~,
L IJ_:_.J~ 70 093 ~)
t 780! 2../ '~y~
I 042 \ ; 40 . 3 9 ~ .
~ i / \' 36 \ 024\(f83 .
~~-/'-~ ( t \
'. cj20' r ~) 0 1 . .
. \ 088 \ 91 ; ~
. " {,n~rl
451 '. }.--'W~-<-~~'9
034 15~",28~ " ,
,:/. ~. ' 32
. ( . .\~26,
,~ 'f)
---
, ,
-------
Regions with 1% or More of National Production
of Paper and Allied Products ~'<
AQCR
%
1 New York, N. Y.
2 Chicago, Ill.
3 Los Angeles, Calif.
4 Philadelphia, Pa.
6 San Francisco, Ca.
7 Boston, Mass.
16 Buffalo, N. Y.
18 Cincinnati, Oh.
29 Portland, Or.
91 Mobile, AI.
3.15
4.31
2.21
3.46
. 1.08
1. 33
1. 04
1. 00
1. 32
1. 33
>:c SIC 26, Paper and Allied Products, includes SIC 2611, Pulpmills,
under which Kraft (Sulfate) Pulp was classified.
C.7
-------
:Zegions wi: 1. 10/0 or :tv :ore of Na :ional ::>ro( uct,ion of Pape r and Al .ie( Pro( ucts
~0
!'it
/~~
{
f .
) I
\ /.
'-:11& q 6
1.9
6
. ~... r~...
.. I b52 ~~.... . r\1\~ .
,~ ~. ( yr;f). ~7a8Wl...
I I ) d~ 17/ t- 75~. 16 74/0 8\I~--- .,~~-- \.J. .
I \ , rS '\-) 8 2~ . . 3 0 .
I i "'--~ 106 5 7b~ '")--,lIVY
I I --------".3 . 1\-f~5-:;-:\ J _...--; 1 8,0 1 o()(J9 ~,./ - 61
I. " I ';>55) Ot.OJ(59713 O. 8 68a~) , 94
~ 43 n 085 r-:64 I 870 - :0 j~~ '
./ 041 f '\ JO \ \ 33 38q~S-~.---(,:::J:'~ ----90
I 027 f "", \ 072 t95 3~ j(/ ,~r' 1~~,~j .'
i 022 \ J \' 9 I ) 'j
, I.' I i 9 6- ""01 9 ~.Y 730 1\92 '
51 r---:---- i 099: ~ ~ j / ~, '
OrY . J. i \..-' -=o.,~.~O 093 ,>;./)
') L - L ) (-_.J Od "-7
048 I i ~4~ \ '~O. 39 ~
I ~~ i / i 36 \ 024 '\~ .
. -- 50 ~ . 020~ ~ ()88/910 1 .. I . -----
..r------- ~ 034 15oP~---28~ .
2, \ ' ~/' 'v'~3 :p32
,"':> .r \ ,/.J \\
( ~ . . '\\ 26
c'\/I.-. (7" ~ . \ I ',,) ,
.?,~ 9
0....... -' ~I,. ./
031
0:>
o
\,0' 44 1
1/9/~~ !
"
-------
Regions with 1% or More of National Production
Of Chemicals and Allied Products >:<
AQCR
%
1 New York, N. Y.
2. Chicago, Ill.
3 Los Angeles, Ca.
4 Philadelphia, Pa.
5 Detroit, Mich.
6 San Francisco, Ca.
9 St. Louis, Mo.
11 Cleveland, Oh.
12 Baltimore, Md.
15 Houston, T x.
18 Cincinnati, Oh.
19 Louisville, Ky.
45 Beaumont - Port Arthur
91 Mobile, AI.
- Orange, Tx.
3.78
'4.95
2.64
4.33
1. 36
1. 22
2. 07
1. 28
1. 36
3.55
2.26
1. 34
1. 14
1. 22
>:< SIC 28, Chemicals and Allied Products, includes SIC's 2819 Indus-
trial Inorganic Chemicals, and 2871, Fertilizer s, under which Nitric
Acid, Sulfuric Acid, and the Phosphate Industry are das sHied.
C.9
-------
Regions wi:h
. '. . d Products
d A .he
. a an
. . ~ Chemlc .
ductlon o.
Pro
' Nationa.
Nore o.
% or . .
. ,
054
I
I
t
.041 027 !
i
I
!
I
I.
I
L
() 048 J
I
. I
...... I
..0
031
I. :
.;
. '\ c.' 44 . !j
. / O/~'/
/ " '/\.. t
'V J
'.
i-!.
'~4.'
~"',
'47/
~ \ >'.\0 ".
-. \ r .-
- , ,
\ ' :z /~, ' "\J8) l-6~'J ','
052 I '----c/r'[1) 7L1 0 8'-(:--" \~O
\ , ( ?1 [75/(\ 16 8~£,- liJo, 61
~ ~4 171 '\) ~~ 7 o,.t~ 94
) 0 '\ d~ j06 5 / 1 8,0 1 ~~~ ) , -90
. . \15- "'---". 0 8 . 'cJ
02< J0973 '{.J ~-~l2.
"""---'-J.055 ' I 8-d 33 380;i~:;~~iJ\\'J .
. \ 085 rQ64 \ 0;/ r 1 O~.\
43 q (072 953~( 0 l 7?() 'i92 ' ,
'\ '-, "~ ---Z:1
-, , ~19 r /)
922 9 ~-" 70 L--rb'io 093)1
099 i ).---~87 ~y
L )~40 '~~3 .
' '780 '. ~ \ ~-. '. \024 ~.
I 042 \ / ' \ 36 , \)
I I ~ I 0... I
"'--c.~:i. \ I, i ' ~
. 020. r. [:88 \91 ~ci\\
. \ !I~ \ " ~'9 .
' ~-<-~, ,
. . I . ~~ .'
' 45;' ~ 32
' , 03415~ , '\~26,
:;7 , , £)}
~ /
r /
.~.
-------
1-
. ~ ..........---". .
APPENDIX D
Convergency Test for 15 AQCRs
-------
,----
,
I
I
A test of actual vs. estimated values has been conducted to test
the speed of convergency of the use of non-linear solution of the nlOdel.
Results of these comparisons are provided here for the largest 15
AQCRs.
The symbols shown in the following pages stand for:
y
= Regional personal income
G
= Regional governn1.ent expenditures
C
= Regional consumption
N-T
= Total regional employment
L
= Regional labor force
W
= Wage l~ate
U
= Regional emploYlnent rate
SUMN
= Total manufacturing employment
D.1
-------
.~. I) C ~:
Y ();i Y I
!; . y .
POLLUTION CONTROLS
'~.'.O'.1..'.~.'.~~.-.~.'..~....'...~......~..*.-_..O~'..'~~....~'..~~~~~.~C....O~...O....~~....O~~4........~
E t.! :1 f) () F. /.J 0 IJ S V 1\ h .
ACTlJ/\L VALUE
I T [ ;.( A 11 0 IJ - 1
ITU~ATION- ?
I TE'~t\T inNS
~J ['::
CO:JVt:P.r.,E:NCr:
PEOCFS5
V!\LUES wITHOUT
F il 2 F. 5 T I .'1, /\ T [' f)
S I r.1l1 L T 11 ,J E. 0 us s Y 5 T E i'1
t\!U t.1 t~ £ P
y CON'll G C 0 ~.j 'J C
S.17 1 2.0(: s'?'i'4.no 37.'1'4s.nn
~;Sr.,07.3J n.n33'!? (,!16S.9R. n.n?rJS2 .3 Lf I 7 I .31-
5')<-;U7.90 n.n:1oQI b (1 b;] . 2 f: o. 0 n n 3;; ]I.j 1 7B.S9
'f 0 ( () r ~ v E f{ G [ =
2
COHV
U.OS321
0.OU021
.qO'..$...Ot~~O.'~..'.~......O..O~.*.b....~...Ob...~.......~~~..~O..U.O~.....~'.....~9......~...OO...Q...Q.'
..
.~".~'...~.~..I,..~.~.~.,.-'.'~.~....~.~.'~..'..D.~'.o~.*.~..~...~......~e.........~..b..~.~~...~.~4.0..C.$.
E ;\.j t) n c; E ~J 0 U c;
'J /" r; ,.,
~\ C T ') .r., L
vr,LI)I~
!T~i?tiTI0n-
! T F. r.~ A T I I) ;.) -
I T F. f~ II 1 lor J S
TO
.~~~~...~~..~OO~~~~~O~~~~~.j~~.~.Q..D.-*~...~...t.~..~~.~~$»..~...~~a~o.~~.....~o~oO..~~~O~.~...~Oe.$..~~~.~
c.; r ,1 u L 1 (, r,j E ,J U S
n 11 rl', f:?> E ;"~
5YSTEI,
.,
I.
,?
fj-T co '4 V L C n ~J v
c:, 1 73 . 7 j S337 . 2f)
.- ! 1,- n 1 n 0(17 I J c;Jf-:7 7U (1 n i1 '1 -"
., . - . . . I '.'
~; j f.. 2 . 'f 6 ':l . (JOU4S c.; :J 6 Lj . 73 n . tJ i1 C ',) f:
7.08
6 . ("{ c;
6.85
(U~)vF.FGf.=
2
Fj
COi'lV
U
0.04
O.D'1
O.OLf
o . 0 3 2 ~> P.
O.OnO!2
CONV
O.Dsn16
D.00075
SUt.1r-J
/1'4'1000
1181..3'700.0.1268
1182.800.DU119
c .J r~ II
-------
1----
1\ (j C F
2
CHICAGO,
ILL.
CONVERGENCE
PROCESS
FOR ESTIMATE!)
V/\LUE5 WITHOUT
POLLUTION CONTROLS
~o.o.o....o......oo.........~...o,~...~.*....o..o........~...oo..o........o...oo...ooo.o....o...o..o...o.o.o
:.
I"
S I i-i U l T II r') E 0 U 5 SYSTEM I'J U M 13 E i~
ENDOGE"JOUS VAR. Y CON V G CONY ( (ON V
I\CTlJAl VALUE 3112S 1 .au 1 91.j I .00 };~7D9.00
J T E R II T I 0 r~ - 1 26899.35 0.11079 1851019 0.f1Y627 1663!;.37 001IU68
tTF.:~ATION- 2 26890.b9 0.00032 1B51.19 o.oonoo 16628.98 0.00056
, .
I'
I..
I.
I
:'
o
'I>
.
ITERI\TIONS
TO
c 0 t.J V ERG E =
2
~."........o..o..o........~.o..oo......~...............o.o.o......¥o.............ooooo............oo......o
. .
roo'..'....,...."'.O.'...*......'..OO'.....'.O~.O.'...............~oo~....-...o........q.oo................
"
[ .
[ STMUlTA~EOUS SYSTEM 'NUMnER - 2
liP.
-
END()('E~!OUS VAR.
ACTUAL V.o.LUE
TTEf?,UtUN- 1
I T E !? A T ION - 2
N-T
)099.'13
311LI.4Y
311<1.79
CONY
L
3178.90
37.36.29
3231>.68
COi')V
W
7.28
7 . 1 7
7. 1 7
CONV
U
0.02
O.O~
O.O~
CONV
sur1N
981.50
996.iil
996.86
CONY
~
':'
o.ooYUY
0.00011
0.01805
0.0(1012
0.01538
0.00003
0.51679
0.00689
0.01519
0.oon~5
"
ITERATIONS TO CnNVERGE=
2
~.&..~..~.........~~....~.o.....~.......................q......&......o........o..~......................o..
-------
f~ j'~ C R
LOS
3
ANGELES,
C!\ L 1 F .
cor. V ( R ri Ei~ C E
PROCE~S FOri
POLLUTION CONTROLS
v :\ L U E S ,~' I THO U T
r :; T ! i'1 A r F. i')
4_5'~~O..t~..O..4~.'.~..~.~.O.O.~.*~.~..~..&.....~.....~.~..9..................S.....~~~~...............~...
E t! f) n G E !.! 0 U 5 V f, R .
,~CTUAL VALUE:
ITERATION-
r T f !~ AT! J N - 1
S I H!J L T PI E 0 U S
s y c:; T E t1
j.J u t., f~ E r-.~
y C (1 j.J V (, ( f) t.J V C
31)}3IS.UD 2~1,67.00 2n057.nn
3H! ! .5 M n.(l)?]/! 2 g] 1 .ns o. 0 I 1. S II !96~90'1O
31fVJ7.7S O.{1nnI2 2("~3i.n:l U.OflnOJ 1 9 6 'ill . :I n
c o~;v
0.01.032
0.0(1026
ITE~~T!0NS. TO C0NVERGE= 2
i~o.e'.$'.....~.....'o.."*.".....~........$...O....4.~.4...~~.....*....~............G.~....&..9.~....~.O.O~
.......'.'P......~~"«....o~~...~.*...oa..Q~.~....~'....'......~~.9..0..Q..~~QQ.........'.~......~...oe......
END IJ G ':: r,JO U S V A R .
!,(T\.IAL VALUF
1 T \:: :~ AT! U !'J - 1
ITF::RAfllJ.'J- ?.
1 T E i( A T 1 0 r-J S
TO
c n.~! V F.. R G E =
2
5 I r-1 U L T A:') E 0 ( j 5
s Y S T [ I':
r,.! U t-; f~ F. R
1.
N-T
?972~03
3f][)9.l'1
3011.13'1
(nr.JV
COWJ
w c a ~J V U (ON V SUMN CON V
7.73 0.05 856010
7.39 O. 0 (I q 2 3 0.011 0019''103 893.113" O.O'i36!
7.39 U.On022 0.0'1 O.OOU26 895.89 0.00275
L
3118.6G
3127.1..3
3129.69
(").1)176'1
n . iJ ! ) IJ"l t]
O.or,29f.l
() . :Fln 6 6
iq~..~~e...~..a."~.......~Q...~.~~...~.~..~...$.'~..~.~~'......'...~.*...~~...OO....~......Q.............O.~
-------
r,oJCP
'1
r H I LAD::: 1- f' H 1 A ,.
p .~. .
C 0 i.1 V E f? (; [ NeE::
PROCESS
FOR
EST I 11.6. T F: ') V A L II F.: 5 '/;. 1 THO U T POL L UTI 0 N (0 N T R 0 L S
99~............~..~~.a..~.~~.o#'....$.'...'.~.04~.~~D..~.~........~.~o..O...4.~~..OO..&...O..O.....~O..'..O'
s r f'l U L T IH! E 0 tI 5
'SY5T[t4
N I ) t.; n E r~
END()GENOUS 'J AR.
rl(TUAL VI\LU~~
!TF.'?t..TION- J
! T F. ~~ AT; (j [.! - 2
Y COUV G CONV ( (ONV
180.16.00 J2t~o.nn I J72~;.Iir:J
J.t.,637.0J n.:.1 7 7 S 7 1 IDSo?2 Oon7'Hl'-i )(133'1.111 no 1 1860
1 !,6 i ? 0 S:; 0.001';7 1 JoSo(]? a.onlll j ln32::;.Slt U.000[36
I TE:.~/I T T OtJS
TO
c 0 ~.) V F R G E =
2
....."...O..~.,.......tO.'..~..'~'O........~....~;4e.~..~o.~o.....~...o....~...o~..........o.o..o...o...o.
..d.....~o'..*...'..o'..o~t.~~~...~e.I.~.O~..'~.~.~e...~.~~....~~DO...~...*.....~~~.O~..~~.....O...Oo...OO.
'51 i1UL T r..r'.!Enus
SYSTU1
,.J U i1[~ E ~;
?
E \1 D (1 G F. ~! 0 IJ S
VAj-;.
:J - T
COr.lv
L
J'l92.20
2 IJ 1 6 . S 3
? r 1 1 7 . r.1 Lj
C Oi.JV
w C O/-J V U COI'IV SUMN CON V
,7.?2 0.03 580.70
7.02 0.02798 OoOl.! O.10.s65 S9{,09S' 0.0279.'3
7001. 0.00010 0.0'1 0.00117 S97.l.!7 a.oooan
4CT!)/.L VfILUF.
ITE,?t;TIUfJ- I
TTF:RfIT!ON- 2
1 ? ? If . Lj' /
1?'H1.BZ
1 9 If 1 .2'1
n.uoBsn
rJ.fJr]i121
0.(11::::21
n . fHHJ 1. 6
I H:i~~\T IONS
TO C0NV[R,';[=
1.
~.."..~....o..O.~~O...'..O......~...O.'~..6.............~~~..o....g......'...oOO...........~.D...O.......O..
-------
A ..]CF
s
r) r. T r... 0 1 T ,
"II C H .
CONVEf?GEt-JCE
P~OCF.S5
r O'~
EST!''',ATFG
vt,LUES V-:rTr-!OlJT
POLLUTION CONTROLS
~.~..o~~..o~....~.~~~~.u.~~~.~~o.~.....~~~~~~.o*,o~~o~.~~.~6~*G'$~.&'4.'.'~~.~.."'.'~'.~"'O"".".'.'OO~O
s r ~.\ U L T rd'! E 0 Ii 5 5 Y 5 T E 11
P U i" n E :\
E:~ [) (\ G UJO US
!\CTU;'.L
VAR.
VALUE
y (ONIJ r (QNV C C O;.JV
\..'
17~3(1[).(jU 1 Ii 5 9 . n [J 9962.'1[1
lil016.7
-------
,
r
"0([':
5 A t J F r~ ., "I ( I S ( 0 ,
CALIF.
6
COtJVERr.UJCE
PROCESS FO~ ESTIMATED
V A LI J F. 5 \"~ I THO lJ T POL L lJ T I 0 tJ CO hi T R a L S
.e~..~~oot..oo..oo~*...~.tq.~.~.~o.~~~'..~..oo.~o**~..o,~.~~.cO..O..$...o...o...o.o..o~..o....q..o...~.....~
ErJ~(,)G~!'IDl!S V/;f-:.
f'CTl)f,L. v/I.LUE
ITEF
-------
A;~ (:-\'
PITTSr3U,,'GH,
P Ii.
~
'.'
(()HVE!"H-FiJCE
Pf~OCt:SS
Vf\l.l.1E~
POLLUTION CONTROLS.
,';!yTHOUT
FOi~
f. S T J r~ II T r f"\
~,,~t~..~~-..~.~....~..$.4.,~~~~.~.a'..~.:«~.4.~~.t..~~Aq~......~O...~....4.~...4..~$..................~a.o..
E t,: 0 1) G F. i JO \J S V f\ f, .
,~CTUAL \ifILUE
fTEf?Ar!UN- J
i T E ;:: AT! u [', - ?
JTEc~ATIorJ5
10
CCHIVE.Rr,f.=
2
") ! 1" U L T r, !~ E 0 U 5
S Y 5 T U!
f.JlJ~18Er~
y C O;,IV (; c t) t.! 'J C (0 iJ V
p,f,r,7.QO "'00.118 5162.00
87",3.34 n.n~6A3 r;P,7.9R O. [} .? n fi 'I S J 9! .32 0.00568
n2C,S.7.8 O.fllJ()23 ~,H7.77 n.Qr-,fJ3S S 2 iJ U . 'j 5 0.00176
. '.f~e':..~..:~.~.f~....~'.....ot....Oo...o.......~...~.....~h....~~.'.~...*o.........~.O.$~.O.........~O.O~
..a.....~o.~o~.e'.~....~.~~'~O~.4~~~*.~.~.~..~.e..~;u~..O~~.C~.~~OO~O~..OO.~.4&..~~~O.~.~..O~~OO~O.O~Oo~.O....~
E :.)') n G [i.J 0 US V A k .
/lCTil/J.L VALUe
! T :: r~ /, T ! U! j - I
ITfRAT!()N- 2
I T F: R t>. T J 0 N.S
r:; ! H U L T f\ ~JF:: Q LJ 5
r-!!.Jr~ nE R
5 Y S T;': i'!
2
Ii-T C'J iJ V L CON'!
9n:;, . 2G '1 3'~ . 1 0
C; 1 3.22 O.!Jn77Lf ry '\ ~ . {, 'i O~0 1 I ~ It
9 I 3 ~38 D.nnO i ~1 9'ii3.7.] o. n (1 [) 'J 9
it, C O:.~V U (ONV SUMN (ON"
7.96 O.GJ 301.70
7.77 0.0237.l 0 . 0 If 0.09795 308070 0.02321
7.77 0.00002 O.r:J1f 0.00182 308.87 0.00055
T 0 C (p., '.} EY G f =
2
'....~.-..'~~*......~~~*.~~..~.~~O&.O..$~.*.~.~.~*...~.~~.*.....&..o~......~~.~....................o....~...
-------
.r. (JUt
ST.
LOiJrs.
r~ 0 .
'1
CONVER(,ENC[
PROCESS
EST P1ATEo
V,'LUES
r'I THOUT
POLLUTION CONTROLS
FOr;>
.C~.~.*.~.'.~..~'.~oo....~~~~.~~..~.'...oo.ooe..&.....~..~o.~o,...O.'.~....~.O.........$..~..............O..
Ell:) () G E :.)0 U 5 V 1\ f-,' .
f\CTUAL VALUE
i rEr::A T i (j:-J- J
! T E F~ A T r lH! - 7.
!TE~.ATIOtJS
S I ('0 U L T " N E 0 I) 5
SYSTEM
NIJM'~E:(
y C 0 i'J V r CONV C CONV
'.J
Hf)C,A.OLJ (, 2 'j . no. Lllls.no
H 117 i .2U O. n 'I 3 '-IS S77..I,'1 n.UQ7.3! c:,30! .99 O. 1 2 Lj 'j 9
gLI'-,"/.21 O.UO!bS 571 .71, 0.onlS4 S.12J.f:,1 0.00lt08
TO (O"JV['?GE=
7.
,~~,'.'~~..~.AO~...~O~'O~~O*..~~~..O*O'.O~~~.6.00.'~'~........+.....o~.~.o........~....~....o......o..o....e
.~..o...o.oo.t......o'..o.ooo.o..o...o.~.'....o'.o.....~4'~."~O.9'.O...'OO...9...~.o..~n...o.........o.~..=
P! IH) (,;:: ~.; 0 u S V A R .
ACTUi\L VALUE
TIE f? A r J 0 t.: - 1
r T E F< ,\ T ! V ~J - 2
S!:"Ulf!\NEOI)S
[.J I) :'1 f~ E Fi
::; Y S T [ r.!
2
~.~ - T C o~! V '- C0NV
9':;'-1.'11 ?AB.Or
9A~;..SI 0.(11 ' 7'1 1 (10.1. IS O.rlc,33
,
9 AS. 'f U O.U0030 1(.103.33 D.nnni~3
If: COi'!V U CONV SUMN CONY
7.Sn U.03 296.90
7.22 0.03711 D.OLj 0.09397 307092 0.03711
7.22 a.DOnls O. CFI 0.00165 308.38' 0.00151
ITERATTON3 TO CONVERGE: 2
'~~.'.?'O.~.........~.".~.....6."............'..+.............'.D..h.~.............................o....q
-------
A ~) C P
", f\ 5 H I t'J r, TO !'j ,
( .
I n
D.
c 0 :~ V ERG r NeE
P !U) C E c..; S
F O;?
E c:; T I 1.\ ATE !)
VALUES ~lTHOUT POLLUTION CONTROLS
'O.'D.O+..~.O..k~.A~,.*.O.'~...~.'...O~~O~*~.O~..~~.O...O.~$......~.........~..$.....G...O.......O.~...O....
E:j:) r: (, E ~J 0 U S
:'.( TUAL
V 1\ f< .
V:-..LU[
I T f~ f..) J"; T I 0 i.: -
!TEf~ArIl'U-
5 ! 1-1 U L T 1', t,! E 0 U '5
s Y S T f r.l
hi U (.1 R E P
!
?
y CON V G C n~JV C CON V
] 1 2 'I 6 . 0 n InS5.nn 7(394.DO
13S~03'f n.J'16(]'i 935.213 O. I 13'1[\ 'i 6 lj 8 . 3 Ii O. lj I I I 6
7397.63 O.nOS8p. '7 3 Lf . '1 9 O.fJr)085 4b-i5.'15 a.DOSCD
! T E;"U. T !rJ1'i S
To
I
C n t~ Ij E !, (, ::: =
2
'O.hO.~'~..O~D..~..~O'.;.O.~.D..O.~~~~.~.....~~...~...~'...~...o...o.o.........*...................D.o.....e
j"'.'.O..'....'~.'..'O~..~.".'..'...'f'...OO..De~..e..~......~~..~.~..~..~...e~.~~..O..O.....O.O..O...QO..
E: r-if)()Gr.r'JOUS V AR.
fl. C T I) l\ L V l\ L l.i E
r T ::: I~ A T I Cd..; - I
iirP,ATIOi\;- 2
I n:: to T I 0 ~l S
TO
( I") ~J Ij E !,~ (i [ =
2
S ! :vi U L T /, ~l E 0 l) S
SYSTU1
,~ lJ 11 !J, f-= ~{
.":2
~! - T C () ~j V L COl.) 'J
111n2.6e Ir}3n.so
IOP].7? O. 0 Ole: '-I, I iJ ~ 2 . 6 'i O.n! 1 7 I.)
iUi),3.6;j O.DonUY 1[1'-12.61 O. nnrJf)3
1'/ CQi.JV U (ON V SUr1N CON V
.1
7. 'I I 0.83 56.80
7.28 0.0173'1 0.0'1 0.38931 57.78 0.0173LJ
7.28 0.00008 O.O'i' 0.00'-183 57.81 0.00038
.UG.'~...~~.Gb.....~...~~.....~.....~.~~..................o...o...............~.....~..............oo..o.o..
-------
A i)C R
11
CLEVELI\'I[) ,
OHIO
c 0 i~ V E H G E ~~ C [
PtlCCESS
Fori
EST r i.j A T F. ~
VAtU;::S WrTHOUT
POL L UTI 0 t-J
CONTROLS
.U.~.~~.~q.~....O.....q09~...~...~O.~.O.'..~.O~.~¥..2.........t~~..O...b......~...~~o.............~.b........
Sr1'-:ULT,\NEDUS
S Y S T F.: t1
r~ u "i f3 E f~
ENOOGE'JQU5 VAR.
,\CT!JAL vALUE
I T E f~ .t. T I U II - 1
! T E '7 A T I u t,= - 2
Y C a :.J IJ (, cot-.j\! C CONV
H 'I A b . n lJ 613.nn SO'j8.(J(J
26'17.33 n. U 2 I 'I 2 sel . f., (, D.USI 1 2 S I~ 'i U . ~ 2 0.0777'1
g6:n. I 't G.nol 1 » 581 . j B 0.0!)[183 c,'i3'i.f>[ ().ODI07
ITERATlnNS 10 CO~VERGE= 2
l.h..~..~....~...~~..u.~~'~.~..P.......OO~.~.9.~~...t~.~g.'...O........$'....q9.G..~...O...~.....O.......O...
I.d~.~..~.....~...v..~..o.~.~~...~......*r,.......ow.$,.b.......o'q.Q~~~.~..~.$.~.~....~~.O~..Q.O.OO.......O.
5 I IW L 1 ~. N E 0 U S
5YSn::1
:'J I) r1 S E h'
r:
E ~F) n (i ,~ ~.: 0 U S vr.t\. 14 - T CONV L
r.CTU!~L '.'.A LU[ .:s 7 B . 1 'i 90S.3!"'
! T F. f? .~ T I lJ i~ - I R'?l1.3J [.J.lll 31-3'7 '121.f.70
! rEf( J\ T I OfJ- 2 P,9fi.'J'i D.(]iJUoR ? 2 S . 'j n
CO~~V
'N CONV lJ CON V SUMN CONV
7.gb 0.03 306.90
7.SS 0.03999 0.0'1 0.25137 318.70 0.038'16
7.S:; 0.DOOD3 0.0'1 O.[)0792 319.66 0.00302
o . n ? ! 'i 3
D.,FJIJ7S
ITEf~ATI()NS
TI) Cf)I\IVFRc;E=
2
..........~*...~~.~_....*~*4....0.0.0*..04t6.~...O~.~*..~......$o.'..$.....Oo.....O...O.......O.........OO..
-------
,'I,:~ C i-(
i ?
n ,'\ L T ! I'; () P E .
r'l Y .
C 0 i~ V E R (, E h C E
PROCESS FOr?
EST I r'.1ATF.:n
v:,U'F.S
',; I THO U T
POLLUTION CONTROLS
a~..~.L'..~.~e9~.....g~...~.~....~..~~.*.~:.....=.~~......~.*t~~~~~....~~O........O.O...O....O.O..O......O.'
s r tW L T II ~J E 0 LJ S
S Y 5 T E' ~1
f\J 11:1, !1E!,
, [~J D 0 (j F. ~'J 0 U S V A k .
ACTUt>.L. VALUE
I T[PA T J (;1~- I
f T [' R Po T I \J 14 - ?
y CON V G CO/'IV C C 0 ~J V
7'L)n.uu (~ 'I S . n f1 't A 6 {, . fJ 0
1<;\6.26 n. 0 I 321 1.>37.73 D. (! t 1 ., $.I '1'7 .~ 'J . 11 IJ 0.02033
..:. .'
7 S 'J 3 . Q 9 O.{JUD'71 637.1(1 [J.Ur)r1U3 '1763.82 0.00062
! 1 E < ~ T 10.tJS
10
c () ~,I V E i< (j ~ =
2
.~'O.Oq.~..P...~~.~..#~.'~OUO'..O~=.4.~T....~..~.*~*..~.~...~...o..~......*oo..~o..o....o......oo.o.o......<
oo~o..~.~~.~.....'~o.~~..~~...**o...o.~....o...~*~~~e~.~~O.$O...~oqO~$~~O~~.~O~~..~....O...O........~OC.C."
5 r i-\ U L T " ;'J E C; U S
C;YST[I"
'..J U H ~ E f~
?
E !! iJ I] G F. i! -:1 U S
"i A F: .
,.J - T (ONV L ( () !< V
ij \ 2.75 :335.]0
H1 3.57 G.OO ! OJ. :1 '-1 '1 . 9!i 0.01 I 59
8 1 3.S9 O.t10rlO?' :~ 'I 'I .99 a.annul
w c 0 ~JlJ lJ CON V SUMN CON V
7.G8 0.03 209080
7.G5 0.003'19 O.OLJ O.38LJ17 210.6'1 p.OO'-lOI
7.ns 0.UOOi)2 O.O'i 0.00575 210.6'1 0.00002
;~CTi)';L Vf,Ll;C
ITERATiO,-'J- I
r T ': R r, T I U t~ - ?
! T E ;~ 1\ T I 0 !\j 5
10
C n ~J V Ef? G E =
2
C~.~.:Q..~~.Q~O._~....~~~......~.~'...oa.o...o~....~........~.........a.....o....................o.e...ee..'
-------
J\ (~ C i~
! '1
'.1 I ;,1;-'1 F. A P () L ! S - :; T .
P A!.J L .
i.1 ! i'J r,j .
C a I-J'J E R (, El-J C E
PROCESS FO~
ESTIr1ATED
VALUES
~I r THO U T
POL L UTI 0 ~J
CONTROLS
~1.O..C.~..~..C$..Q,~*...~O...........~+O.O*~.O*.~«t.~.~.~$..*...........~...........G.........o...o.ooo.e.'
'5 I j"'UL T o,NEOUS
5Y5T::.H
N lH1 G E ;<
U~ i) r) G F. N 0 U S V A i-\ .
f,(TUAL VALUe
i T '- ;~ II T I () (J - 1
!TEi~AT!CIi'i- 2
y co I'J V G CON V C CON V
71C,L!.OlJ ,t.., '13.00 qO!>7.r:1D
7(J73ol8 0.0113fJ [.;69.3E 0-11'1'1'7 'i47S.66 0.100'1'3
/rJr;2.IU o.n0298 S6P..9.1 O.O(HJ79 '1'162..12 0.00298
! T E ,< ,~ T ! 0 ~J S
Tv
((HJV[PGE=
2
....'..~~.......'..*U..o...:.*..'.«...~............$.........o............~....o...............o.....o.....'
.'O..4..........~...............~.........'.~~'..4.*'O~~.*.~O.O..OO&OO..4.....'.o.ooO...O.....40.00.....90.'
S ! 11 U L TAN E 0 I) 5 SY5H:M N l J ~1 P E i.; 2
£ N () n G E ~JO U S V:\ R. 1\1-T CO!o,JV L COf.JV W CONV U CON V SUt1N CONV
f\CTUI\L V;\LUE 7 ~; 7 . 8 S 77LI.90 7. '19 0.02 203080
I T f. RAT 1 0 r.J - J 7 [, '1 . "I ,; O.f1[!i'17n 793.9Cf O.D?'ib'f 7.?'t 0.03236 0.0"1 0071179 210.37 0.0322"1
!TF~!\TIO~J- 2 7/,'1.66 0.00029 79"1.12 D.nf"JOlb 7.2'1 0.00000 0.0"1 0.0152"1 210.67. 0.00117
ITERAT!0N- 3 764061 O.lJOUDI 7 9 ,~ . 1 2 o.onUDI 7.2"1 0.0 0.0"1 0.00010 210.62 0.00000
IT~RAT!ONS TO CO~VERG~= 3
!"...'.~..o.........~..~...v~"...o..$...~...u.......!..,...o..tQ......o~...o..oo................o.oo......O'
~-
/
------- ~ -
-------
tJ.,.....'( R
! 5
HOUS Tot',
Tf~ X II S
C\.JI
-------
,,:~ C i<
If.,
!~ U F F ,', L 0 ,
r f~ () (. F :, S F 0 f?
"
" .
y .
F.5T J i1J1.'j rD
\J.~LUr::5
~ITHOUT POLLUTION CONTROLS
c 0 tJ V c:: tU; E N C t:
r.*.~Q.O...O..O~..~...~~..~.~~...~...~O.~..*..~.....~.~.............~...8...~~O...9~....O..O~..~OOO.OO..COOO
E ~~ f) (1 (i.. 'J U U S V !II';' .
I\CTUI~L VfI.LuE
!TE:-?AT!!JN-
! T F RAT i C' N - ?
I T E t~ !>. T !O ~J S
') r 1-1 U L T ,\ ~ J E 0 U 5
y
; Ljon'i~utJ
t, J Fi 'I . '1 3
(; ,; 1 2 . 2 D
T:J C n \1 1/ F.: P (, E =
2
CON V
n.32B'Ip.
n . I J n 't :~ S
C:;YST,:r-t
N LJ t--1 n E R
en j.J V
O.nC154li
G.nnnl2
(
3D76.no
';[167.92
'1(l7fJ.'-IFj
COi.JV
c;
SG7..fJrJ
11'19.:>7
,-;9(1.21
0.322'17
0.00063
.~Q....~O.8.~....O........q~.....O.8...~..~.....~..~.....~...C.~.~.....~.~...................OO.OooO.O..OO..
;O"..4...~~..........~...~.O...4...0...~..~...+>~~~~~.S~~~~.+.~..~4~~$~~..*.~G.....O~O$....OO~O~OOO..O~..O.~
END 0 G F. ~) () u S V A f( .
. I\CTUI\L 'jALUf
ITERATiuN-
ITERAT!()fj- 2
I T E i-? l~ T I 0 r~ 5
TO
C (1 '-J V f:: F G E =
2
5 T '1 U L T i\ ,-I E () lJ S
N-T
S!r..12
S? ! .7'::>
S22..rJl1
C f) iJ V
0.0(1701
O.D00'19
s y 5 T [' 11
j.! U ~'i 8 E F:
CO\JV
O.(Jfl?9\
0.0801'1
2
\IV (0 rJ V U CON V SUr-1N (ONV
7.69 0.05 176060
7.S::, O. 0 2 1 Ij 3 O.OLi 0.20823 180.LiD 0002152
7.SZ 0.00011 D.OLt OoOOSSI 18a.Li9 a.OOOLf7
"."~4.~C....~.~~.~~.O.C.~~~....~.~.*..~'.**......~M$.~~~~.~...~~.....~.~..b.~....~.OO....O...O..O.....O...4~
l
:::, l.! 3. 10
r)'i1.~}7
SLil.6?
------- |