EPA-600/5-73 012d
February 1974
Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series
Studies in Environment -
Vol. IV-
Consumption Differentials
and the Environment
\
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC Z0460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and appli-
cation of environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping
was consciously planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum inter-
face in related fields. The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the SOCIOEOONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
series. This series includes research on environmental management, compre-
hensive planning and forecasting and analysis methodologies. Included are
tools for determining varying impacts of alternative policies, analyses of
environmental planning techniques at the regional, state and local levels,
and approaches to measuring envirormental quality perceptions. Such topics
as urban form, industrial mix, growth policies, control and organizational
structure are discussed in terms of optimal environmental performance.
These interdisciplinary studies and systems analyses are presented in forms
varying from quantitative relational analyses to management and policy-
oriented reports.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and Development,
EPA, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or ccmmercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
EPA-600/5-73-012d
February 1974
STUDIES IN ENVIRONMENT
Volume IV
Consumption Differentials and the Environment
by
Mary Beth Olsen
Ethan E. Bickelhaupt
Donnie H. Grimsley
Cherie S. Lewis
Pamela Scott
Grant No. 801473
Program Element 1HA098
Project Officers
Samuel Ratick
John Gerba
Environmental Studies Division
Washington Environmental Research Center
Washington, D.C. 20460
Prepared for
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 29*02
-------
ABSTRACT
Campaigns to clean up the environment traditionally focus
on sources of pollution for possible ways of changing or
adding to industrial processes as a means to reduce or abate
undesirable residuals in the atmosphere, water courses and
in the land. Quick remedial actions often are obtained in
this manner. These solutions, however, often require con-
stant maintenance of retrofitted devices and technologies
used in production and monitoring of results. Sometimes
longer lasting results can be obtained with less attention
to maintenance and monitoring aspects when substitutions of
material inputs can be made. But fundamentally, pollution -
whatever the source - is a direct reflection of the behavioral
patterns of the comsuming public. In order to achieve long
lasting positive reductions of pollutants, basic attitudinal
changes must be effected toward what goods and services are
demanded, in what quantities, as well as attitudes toward
usage and disposal of these items. It is this last area in
which this report makes initial contributions.
Through the use of a mathematical model, both direct and in-
direct industrial pollution generated by fluxuations of the
entire economy are tied to behavioral patterns of the con-
suming public. The model studies consumer behavior patterns
from three viewpoints: income of family, age of head of
family, and regional location of family within the United
States. The methodology relates 126 final consumption in-
dustry groupings to 48 consumer item (product) groupings of
the National Conference Board's taxonomy. The heart of the
methodology employs the Resources for the Future's "National
Pollution Mddel", basically an input-output plus residual
technique.
Findings focus on most polluting industries, and the pollution
associated characteristics of sub-groups of the U.S. population,
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract ii
List of Tables iv
Acknowledgments v
Sections
I Conclusions 1
II Recommendations 1
III Introduction 3
IV Methodology 9
V Pollution Data 14
VI Consumer Pollutants 19
VII Personal Consumption Items 21
VIII Required Work on Consumer Product Usage 27
IX A Theoretical Input-Output Model for Household 31
Consumption
X Appendix % 35
111
-------
TABLES
No. Page
1 Water Pollutants (1970) ' 15
2 Air Pollutants (1970) 17
3 Solid Waste (1970) 18
4 Conceptual Input-Output Model for Household 32
Consumption
iv
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
for Environmental Protection Agency:
Samuel Ratick, Physical Scientist, BSD, Fellows Counselor
John Gerba, Chief, Special Projects, ESD, Report Production
for Homer Hoyt Institute:
Maury Seldin, President
for National Bureau of Standards;
Lynn G. Llewellyn, Research Psychologist, TAD
HOMER HOYT INSTITUTE
John Kbkus, Jr., Deputy Director
John Hantnaker, Research Director
Ira Bechoefer, Sr. Research & Administrative Assistant
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS
Marilyn Westfall, Operations Research Analyst, TAD
Gail Hare, Research Psychologist, TAD
Donald Corrigan, Legislative Research Analyst, TAD
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Stanley M. Greenfield, Assistant Administrator for Research and
Development
Leland Attaway, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Research
Peter House, Director, Environmental Studies Division
Robert Livingston, Research Analyst, ESD
Alan Neuschatz, Chief, Environmental Management Research Branch,
ESD
Philip D. Patterson, Assistant to the Director, ESD
Albert Pines, Operations Research Analyst, ESD
Martin Redding, Chief, Comprehensive Environmental Planning Branch,
ESD
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
The major conclusions of this study are:
1) For each of the 12 types of pollutants considered separ-
ately, concentration patterns emerged where the highest ten
consumer items represent 30-55% of all consumer expenditures
and 65-95% of all pollution.
2) For all consumer pollution categories considered as a whole,
ten items were found to contribute the major proportion.
These were:
Meat, Poultry and Eggs
Apparel
Autos, Parts and Repair
Dairy Products
Shelter and other Realty
Home Utilities
Fruits and Vegetables
Cereals and Bakery
Toiletries
Insurance
3) The highest income groups over-consume on these top ten
consumer items, and therefore over-contribute to pollution
caused in the production of these items relative to their
proportion of the population.
4) The consumer groups with age-of-head of household 35-54
over contribute to pollution by ^heir consumption habits,
and groups with age-of-head of household under 25 and over
65 undercontribute, relative to their proportions in the
population.
5) Regional consumption patterns showed no significant
differences which were not accounted for in the analysis of
income and age-of-head household groups.
6) Food items show relatively little over-consumption.
7) Toiletries arid shelter items show some over-consumption
in highest income and middle-age groups.
8) Apparel, autos and insurance are-luxury items and indi-
cate high over-consumption patterns for certain consumer
groups.
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Reducation of specific types of pollution, should concen-
trate efforts on the highest consumer items, for that pollu-
tant type.
-------
2) The focal point in reducing overall pollution, should be
the ten highest consumer items listed in conclusion 2.
3) Efforts to reduce pollution through' alteration of consump-
tion patterns should be concentrated on households earning
over $10,000 per year, and with age-of-head of household 35-54.
4) Pollution reduction efforts directed at food items should
concentrate efforts on production methods rather than on
changing consumption patterns since food consumption is rela-
tively inelastic.
5) Toiletries and shelter are relatively elastic and there-
fore more readily susceptible to efforts to affect changes in
consumption patterns.
6) Apparel, autos, and insurance constitute luxury items,
which are subject to high over-consumption, and thus highly
susceptible to changes in consumption patterns.
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
III.A The Consumption Model
The problem of pollution of the American environment
has been approached from three basic perspectives: 1) over-
population, 2) partialistic technology, and 3) profit prac-
tices of the industrial sector of the economy. Each of
these perspectives, by approaching pollution from a differ-
ent point of view, suggests its own particular solution to
the problem: i.e., birth control measures, a systems ap-
proach to technological problems, and higher values placed
on the use of common property resources. Each of these, in
a sense, deals with one of the many aspects of the pollution
problem, and in its own right, gives some insight into the
overall problem. The increasing population, the increasing
use of synthetic materials, and the increasing use of air,
water, and land for disposal of industrial effluents, all
play a part in the dramatic increase in pollution and its
accompanying environmental and health problems.
Each, however, tends to ignore or discount the import-
ance of the consumptive nature of the American society.
While the U.S. contains only about 6% of the world,1 s popu-
lation, it consumes between 40% and 60% of the world's re-
sources. These figures indicate that the problem of pollu-
tion can neither be properly nor completely analyzed and
understood without taking into consideration the dispropor-
tionate consumption [usage and disposal] of energy and re-
sources that characterizes American society.
The consumption model which follows presents a more
comprehensive and integrated view of the problem of pollu-
tion, one in which the nature of consumption, as well as
overpopulation, partialistic technology, and profit, is
given appropriate consideration.
III.A.,1 The Production-Consumption Flow
There is a basic flow of goods and materials in any
society which serves the needs of the populace in terms of
food, clothing, and shelter. As the society becomes more
advanced, the needs also expand to include recreational,
educational, and personal service needs, which must also be
served through the economic system. In American society,
as in most of the other advanced nations, this flow of goods
and services to the consuming public constitutes the primary
basis for the entire economy, and the strength of the nation
is dependent on this very complex and interdependent system
of products and services.
-------
The flow of products can be thought of as roughly di-
vided into two basic areas, production and consumption. The
first segment of the cycle [production] begins with decisions
regarding raw materials, the collection of those materials,
the industrial decisions to make certain products in certain
ways, the production of interindustry products and services,
decisions regarding final production of consumer goods and
services, and finally, the final production of those goods
and services. The innumerable interindustry flows of mat-
erials and services [building, equipment, business services,
etc.] are all aimed at filling intermediate steps in the
flow of products and services to the consumer.
The connecting steps between production and consumption
are the delivery and retailing of goods and services [market-
ing] to the-consumer, and the purchase of vthose goods and
services by the consumer.
The second area of flow, consumption, involves decisions
regarding product usage, the actual usage of the goods and ser-
vices, decisions regarding disposal, and the ultimate disposal.
The various consumption decisions and processes constitute, in
the aggregate, consumer demand, which functions as a feedback
providing an input into the various production decisions.
Insofar as the total production-consumption flow [Figure 1]
is the basis of the economy, such a flow provides the most
comprehensive approach to analyzing the problems of pollution.
IIJD,;At2 Process Components of the Model
Pollution results from every process along the flow.
The first process, the collection of raw materials needed to
make the product by definition encompasses the excavation of
mineral and chemical substances, the cutting and removal of
lumber, and commercial catching of fish among others. Pollu-
tion from excavation includes such things as acid mine drain-
age, slag piles resulting from solid waste in the excavation
process, and pollution resulting from the operation of mach-
inery and equipment (both pollution from generation of elec-
tricity and the operation of internal combustion engines).
Pollution from the cutting and removal of lumber includes
particulates in air pollution, as well as suspended solids
•discharged into nearby bodies of water. Pollution from the
fishing industry includes water pollution from oil spills,
and solid wastes from the boats themselves. '
The next process in the flow of goods to the consumer
involves interindustry flows of materials, which includes the
manufacturing of equipment, the construction of buildings,
the delivery of agricultural products., the provision of busi-
ness services, and the manufacturing of intermediary products
prior to the inception of production for final demand. Pol-
lution from the interindustry segment is characterized by
typical air, water and land pollutants from manufacturing,
business, and construction, as well as agricultural pollution
(e.g., suspended and dissolved solids", and pesticides and
herbicides).
4
-------
The next'process component is final production. This is
defined to include only those activities and processes which
directly result in goods or services which go directly to a
final consumer (i.e., excludes all interindustry flows).
Several types of pollution arise from final production, which
includes the final manufacturing process of consumer items,
the final processing of agricultural products and the pro-
cessing of goods immediately prior to retailing. Among the
pollutants attributable to the final production process are
dissolved and suspended solids, organic compounds, carbon
monoxide, and solid wastes. Although the final delivery of
services results in less direct pollution than the final
production of goods, such pollution (including transportation
and construction of buildings for retail activities) remains
a significant problem.
The next segment of the flow entails the usage and dis-
posal of goods and services. This is the first process
where pollution is directly attributable to the consumer.
Usage pollution involves such things as residential water
usage, domestic electrical usage, pesticide and fertilizer
usage, and solid waste generation. Usage pollution depends
essentially on four factors: the frequency, mode, complete-
ness or extent of product usage, and product quality or effi-
ciency.
III.AJ3 Decision Components of the Model
The decision components of the flow fall into two cate-
gories of production and consumption. There are three main
production decisions: 1) raw material decisions, 2) inter-
industry production decisions, and 3) final production deci-
sions. The two consumption decisions are: 1) purchase/usage
decision and 2) disposal decision. There is obviously little
or no direct pollution generated by these various decisions
components. However these components are vital in that they
determine the type and amount of pollution that will be pro-
duced by each of the processes. Any attempt to solve the
problem of pollution must address itself to these decision
points, since although pollution is a product of the various
processes, it is ultimately caused or brought about by the
decisions discussed above. What the consumptive model shows
is that the decision maker, at any given decision point shares
with all those decision makers that preceded him in the flow,
the responsibility for the pollution caused by their combined
decisions. For example the responsibility for pollution caused
by the decision to strip-mine coal must be borne not only by
the extractor, but also by the interindustry decision maker
who demands coal to produce steel, as well as by the consumer
who demands new and larger automobiles made of steel.
III.A*4 The Feedback Components
The first and most important feedback components are the
demand feedback loops. Consumer demand has traditionally been
viewed in terms of the effects of purchase decisions on the
-------
final product decisions. The consumption model indicates quite
clearly that demand feedback plays a greatly expanded role.
Not only does consumer demand influence all the production de-
cisions but a given production decision also influences the
production decision (s) that precedes it. This is the ration-
ale for the distribution of responsibility for pollution
(indicated previously) among the various decision makers.
The assessment of responsibility in the coal-steel-auto ex-
ample is based on the interactions of this demand-feedback
loop. The final consumer who voices his demands for an auto-
mobile, in a sense initiates the demands by the automobile in-
dustry producers for steel and electricity from other interin-
dustry and raw material producers, and can be seen to share re-
sponsibility for the pollution caused in their production.
Recycling is the set of feedback loops into the industrial
phase whereby raw materials or intermediary products used in
making final products, are reclaimed for use at various stages
in the industrial process. The solid waste which results after
usage of the consumer item is a function of the type, frequency.-
and completeness of the usage method. These wastes can be dif-
ferentially re-integrated into the industrial system depending
on the original quality of the product, the various types of
components, (e.g., metal, plastics, wood) which are used in
combination to make the product, and differential technologies
which can be applied to the recycling process. To a certain
extent, the ease of recycling products should not be the prim-
ary concern in industrial planning. Rather, the primary concern
should rest with the quality of the products so that product
life will be extended, thus eliminating the power and resources
necessary to return the recycled product to usable form.
III.A. 5 Application of the Model
This model indicates that the demand for goods, and services
begins with the consumer. His demand for a final product feeds
back to the final producer who must satisfy these demands. The
final producer, in turn, makes demands on the interindustry
producers for those goods and services which he needs to ful-
fill the consumer's demands. Interindustry producers, again,
turn to the raw material producers for satisfaction of their
demands for raw materials. In this way, the consumers' demand
for final products feeds back along the flow to create the
other demands for intermediate goods and services and raw
materials.
It is obvious that the various production processes
contribute to pollution. However, to the extent that
the purpose of production is to satisfy demand, demand becomes
the effective cause of pollution. Although this model places
the greatest emphasis on consumer demand as the effective
causal agent of pollution, this then does not absolve indus-
try and its accompanying technology of its share of responsi-
bility for the creation of new consumer items or new types of
consumer services. Nor does the model attempt to quantify in
-------
a specific manner the relative importance of each of these
factors. It does, however, place more than nominal importance
on the role of the consumer and his independent decision-making
process.
Consumer demand begins in essentially two ways. First,
the consumer originates demands to fulfill basic needs (food,
shelter, clothing) in conventional forms. Second, convenience,
price, and novelty, as engineered by new technologies and
industries, tend to enlarge consumer markets and modify con-
sumer demand through media/advertising. Original consumer
needs stimulate production of new items to fill current needs
in a better way. This new production or technology expands
current consumer markets with lower prices and greater con-
venience. While advertising brings new products to the atten-
tion of the consuming public and helps to initiate needs
which it can supply. In this way, the creation and modifica-
tion of consumer demand sustains the flow of goods and ser-
vices in the economy.
The question, "Who is really to blame for pollution?",
remains the subject of heated debate. Arguments are based on
the nature of biological systems, on the role of industry and
economics in the society/ on the morality of interference
with individual freedom, and so on. Depending on the perspec-
tive, responsibility seems to shift from industrial organiza-
tion, to overpopulation, to partialistic technology, or to
inefficient or non-existant common-property resource manage-
ment. This model however, takes a wider perspective, and sees
responsibility resting with decision makers at all levels.
The responsibility for pollution caused in the production of
autos, from raw materials to final product, is shared by the
final consumer as well as the decision makers at all levels
of the production process who placed demands for goods and
services on other industrial sectors for completion of the
final product. This model, by centering on the entire pro-
duction-consumption cycle, can focus attention on all the re-
levant contribution factors to the pollution. The industrial
decisions to use particular production methods or materials,
the ineffective control mechanisms for common resource use,
the increasing number of consumers and their mounting product
demands, can each be evaluted as to their influence on total
pollution.
III.A.6 An Illustration of the Model in Use
A brief example of how the model traces the flow of goods
from raw materials through final disposal will serve to illus-
trate both the flow of the model and the decision-making pro-
cess whereby decisions affecting differential pollution are
made. Paper lunch bags vs. steel lunch boxes can serve as an
illustration of this cycle of demand, production, and use.
Let us assume, for the sake of simplicity that there is
a demand by consumers for lunch containers, and that there are
two kinds of lunch containers, paper bags and steel lunch boxes.
-------
This consumer demand feedback for lunch containers thus places
demands on the final producers who must decide which type of
container, paper or metal, will be produced. On the basis of
some marketing information the final lunch container producer
decides to produce some mix of paper bags and metal boxes for
the market. This final producer then places demands on the
interindustry producer for equipment and machinery needed to
manufacture the paper and steel which will go into them. This
in turn places demands on the raw material producer for the
wood and iron ore needed to make the two different materials.
The felling of trees and the extraction of the iron ore, the
manufacture of the machinery and equipment, and the final pro-
duction of the lunch containers produces differential pollu-
tion at each of the production processes, depending on the
material.
As the lunch containers are finally produced and deliver-
ed to market, the consumer exercises his perogative to choose
which type of lunch container, if any, he will purchase.
After purchase, the consumer will use his lunch container
differentially. He will typically use the paper bag only once
or twice, whereas he will probably use the steel lunch box re-
peatedly over a longer period of time. Finally, the consumer
will dispose of the lunch container either by recycling or
throwing the container away differentially. Following final
disposal, the demand for another lunch container reoccurs.
However, as the model indicates, the production demand influ-
ence affects the consumer demand for lunch containers (e.g.,
advertising may induce the consumer to switch from paper bags
to steel lunch boxes). This change in demand would, through
the demand feedback mechanism, affect all the production de-
cisions.
Thus, the model clearly shows that the flow of goods and
services from raw materials to final disposal is not linear
and static, but rather circular and dynamic, constantly adjust-
ing itself through the mechanism of the various feedback loops.
8
-------
SECTION IV
METHODOLOGY
IV.A Production Data
The data dealing with the production sequence of the flow
chart were obtained from previous studies by R. Ridker at Re-
sources for the Future (RFF)-1 These studies began with an
input-output model of the American economy, developed in the
Bureau of Business and Economic Research at the University of
Maryland, under the direction of Clopper Almon. This model
contains some 185 production sectors, 126 of which go to per-
sonal consumption.2 These sectors are defined in the model as
special aggregates of the two-and three-digit Standard Indus-
trial Classification (SIC) codes. For each of these sectors
the material provided by RFF gives pollution emissions per
dollar of output of each sector in the base year, 1967.
Pollutants were divided into air, water, and solid wastes.
Air pollution emissions were divided between emissions from
heat and power generation and emissions from industrial pro-
cesses. Air pollutant emissions factors derived from several
sources for coal, gas, and fuel oil were applied to calculate
total emissions from heat and power generation for manufactur-
ing sectors, with fuel consumption information being obtained
from the Census of Manufacturers (1963). For non-manufactur-
ing sectors, emissions factors were applied to the output base
of a particular sector to calculate emissions from heat and
power generation. In a similar manner, air pollution emissions
coefficients from industrial processes were developed per unit
of output. Finally, the combined coefficients for air pollu-
tion emissions of both types were provided.
A study by the International Research and Technology Corp-
oration (IR&T), A Model for Strategic Allocation of Water Pol-
lution Abatement Funds,3 provided a significant portion of the
water pollution data for the RFF work. Among the data were
included emission factors, urban runoff and waste water loads,
and waste water from livestock.
1967 solid waste loads generated by particular sectors
were obtained from information included in previous studies,
such as one completed by Combustion Engineering, Inc. Solid
waste coefficients were developed by dividing waste loads by
output bases.
In terms of input-output equations the core model can be
shown as:4
AX+Y=X
where X=column vector (185 x 1) of total outputs
Y=column vector (185 x 1) of final demands
A=185 - order matrix of input - output coef-
ficients
and combined to
AX=intermediate demands.
-------
Solving the above equation for X using simple matrix algebra:
x = (I - Aj-iy
and
^
S2??^^
* 2? will help in interpreting this equation. The
of the matrix dealing with interindustry transactions
t?nn reP5ese?tatio* °f the inverse matrix in the above eSSa-
dollars ^f VVh±VnVerSe matrix indicate the number
S ii £1° outPut of each sector (sectoral output) neces-
deilver a dollar's worth of each commodity to final
ix ciS ^V^^T^ : The *««=«* partof the ma-
ditLS ^L ?lnal de?tlnation (final demand) of the commo-
dities from various sectors and is categorized by government,
investment, and personal consumption expenditures (foreign
trade account not listed). The final column lists the total
outputs for various industries in terms of dollars
w^v, ^taCh?d ^° the matrix is another component which deals
with the pollution emitted by each industry during the pro-
duction of commodities. In matrix algebra notation, this com-
ponent3 can be described as:
P = MX
where p = column vector (12 x 1) of total pollution
X = column vector (185 x 1) of total outputs
from previous equation
M = matrix (12 x 185) of pollution coefficients.
The matrix, M, transforms total output into pollution resulting
from industrial production, since sectoral output is related
to sectoral final demands (the dominant share of which stems
from personal consumption expenditures) , and since pollution
generation is related to sectoral output level, a relation
exists between final demand and the pollution generated by the
economy to satisfy this demand, thus:
P = M (I - AP^-Y
IV. B Product ion-Cons umption Categorie s
The basic data for consumption expenditures was taken from
Expenditures Patterns of the American Family^ by the National
Conference Board in New York (1965). Data from the National
Conference Board (NCB) was collected through a survey conducted
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U. S. Department of
Labor representing average annual family expenditures for the
10
-------
calendar years 1960 and 1961. The survey is based on a repre-
sentative cross section of the nation's nonfarm population.
"Farm families account for 6% of the nation's population but
a smaller proportion of total consumer buying."?
The first step in setting up the model reported here was
to reconcile the consumption categories found in the National
Conference Board data with the Almon product categories8 in
which the "pollution from production" data were given. This
basically involved a two-step process: first, determination
of the composition of the consumption categories from the
National Conference Board; and second, aggregation and dis-
aggregation of the various categories from both sets of data
to determine the final consumption-production sectors.9
IV. C Consumption Data
After the final consumption-production categories had
been organized, the next task was to calculate the consumption
patterns by groups. It was decided to use proportions of the
family budget spent on each of the ascertained categories, and
then to update these proportions to the year 1970, rather than
to use the actual dollar figures, in order to more easily cir-
cumvent the problem of inflation, in this way, differential
inflation in product categories would be reflected in the pro-
portion of the budget spent for the consumer categories, and
the actual rate of inflation in the economy as a whole would
be reflected in the increased family incomes.
.•The National Conference Board data on consumption by dif-
ferent groups, was then organized into its appropriate consump-
tion-production category, and charts were then developed to
show proportions of the family budget spent for our 48 product
categories by different consumption groups (regional, age of
head, income) and for the U. S.^as a whole for 1960.
IV. D Developing 1970 Proportions
The 1960 data on consumer spending, compiled by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, was the last complete survey
which explored differential consumption patterns by the ana-
lytical groups which we chose for our study, that is region,
age of head, and income. In order to more accurately reflect
changes in the consumption patterns of groups, and differen-
tial changes in.product consumption by the nation as a whole,
between 1960 and 1970, a wide range of informational sources
were integrated into the updating of proportions to 1970.
Since no source of information was available which categorized
consumer buying patterns for.1970 by our analytical groups,
we chose instead to update the total U.S. consumption patterns
with available data and then to apply these changes to the
differential consumption patterns by groups. In this way, it
was assumed that relative proportions spent by the analytical
groups changed in roughly the same way that the total U.S.
proportions changed. •
11
-------
The first basic source of updating information came from
the Department of Commerce Table 2.5 of National Income and
Product Accounts of the United States "Personal Consumption
Expenditures (PCE) by Type of Product."10 The Department of
Commerce's PCE expenditure categories were apportioned to co-
incide with the 48 production-consumption categories. Where
Commerce categories were not sufficiently disaggregated, other
sources of information were incorporated. These included such
sources as FHA, USDA, DOT, National Paper Association, and FDA.
Proportions of expenditures by product category were cal-
culated for 1960 and 1970, and a rate of change within the de-
cade was ascertained.
This rate of increase or decrease was applied to the 48
production-consumption proportions to obtain the new propor-
tions for 1970 for the total U.S. Then this rate of change
was applied to the proportions for each analytical group.
Each new proportion was re-evaluated over the new sum of the
proportions to insure that the proportions for each analytical
group added to 1.
Information on number of households and median income for
each analytical group was obtained from the Bureau of the
Census, General Social and Economic Characteristics, U. S.
Summaryll for 1970 and Current Population Reports,-iz July 1970.
The category proportions for each analytical group were then
multiplied by the number of households and median income of
that group to determine dollar amounts spent by each group for
each consumer item in 1970 dollars.
This dollar amount spent for each consumer item by analy-
tical group was multiplied by the pollution coefficient from
the RFF data, i.e., pounds of pollutants per million dollars
of final product, for each category of consumer item and each
type of pollutant to obtain the pollution contribution of each
consumer item and each analytical group.
12
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. Commission on Population Growth and the American Future,
Research Reports of the Commission on Population Growth and
the American Future, Vol. Ill, Population, Resources, and the
Environment, Ronald G. Ridker, ecu(Washington, D.C. :Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1972.)
2. See Appendix to this study for comparative lists.
3. Ivars Gutmanis, Leslie Ayers, and Charles Schultze, IR&T,
November, 1970.
4. Henry W. Herzog, Jr., and Ronald G. Ridker, "Methodology—
The Model," in Commission on Population Growth and the American
Future, Research Reports of the Commission on Population Growth
and the American Future, Vol. Ill, Population, Resources, and
the Environment, Ronald G. Ridker, ed.(Washington, D.C. :
Government Printing Office, 1972), Chapter II.
5. H. Herzog, Personal Communication, Bureau of Business and
Economic Research, University of Maryland, College Park, Mary-
land, July, 1972.
6. National Conference Board, Expenditure Patterns of the
American Family, New York, 1965, p. 6.
7. Ibid.
8. Clopper Almon, Jr., The American Economy to 1975 (New York:
Harpcr»-Row, 1969.)
9. See Appendix to this study for .the forty-eight personal
consumption categories and the corresponding sectors in the
Clopper Almon and National Conference Board topologies.
10. Department of Commerce. National Income and Product
Accounts of the U.S., pp. 44-47.
11. U.S. Bureau of Census. General Social and Economic Char-
acteristics 1970, Summary, September 1972, pp. 1-458-9.
12. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, "Consumer
Income," Current Population Reports, Series P-60, No. 70,
July 16, 1970.
13
-------
SECTION V
POLLUTION DATA
The data on pollution by each of the product categories
was obtained for twelve pollutants listed below, and shown in
WATER AIR SOLID WASTE
Biological Oxygen Demand Particulates Solid Waste
Suspended Solids Nitrous Oxides
Dissolved Solids Carbon Monoxide
Phosphate Compounds Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen Sulfur Oxides
Tables 3, - 3r For.each of the above pollutant types, the
percent of pollution contributed by each of the 10 highest
polluting items, and the percent of aggregate consumption
expenditures for that item was calculated. Figures for
aggregate consumption expenditures were obtained by
multiplying average median family incomes by the total
number of families for the U.S.
The percent of total pollution figures represents the
sum of all pollution which occurs in production of that item
until it reaches the consumer. Referring back to the model
the pollution- index for each item comprises all pollution
caused in the extraction of the raw materials, the pollution
from all interindustry production of goods and services, and
the pollution from final production of each consumer item.
The most important characteristic common to these
tables are the two concentration patterns: while these top
10 categories represent 30 to 55% of all consumption
expenditures they represent 65 to 95% of all pollution in
each category. This implies that efforts to combat
pollution can and probably should be concentrated on those
few consumer commodities that result in the greatest
pollution. In general, agricultural products are the
preponderant source of water pollution; utilities, housing,
and automobile products are the major contributors to air
pollution, and these two together produce the bulk (80%) of
the solid waste pollution. (Utilities, housing, and
automobiles primarily contribute inorganic solid waste;
agricultural products contribute primarily"organic solid
waste).
Perhaps most notable is the frequency with which
certain categories seem to reappear at the top of each
pollutant list. These categories, which comprise a list of
"top pollutant" items, will be further examined in the next
section.
14
-------
TABLE 1
WATER POLLUTANTS (1970)
Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD-54,228 million Ibs.)
(10)
(9)
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Consumer Items
*Meat/ Poultry and Eggs
Dairy Products
Apparel
Toiletry Items
Laundry and Cleaning Supplies
Drugs and Medical Equipment
Cereals and Bakery
Fruits and Vegetables
Autos, Parts, and Repair
Sugar and Confections
Percent
of Total
Pollution
42.6
11.4
5.4
4.7
3.4
3.3
2.9
2.6
2.5
2.3
81.0%
Percent of
Aggregate Consump-
tion Expenditures
5.4
2.5
5.7
2.7
2.0
1.3
2.2
2.5
8.9
.5
33.7%
Suspended Solids (932,282 million Ibs.)
Meat, Poultry and Eggs
Dairy Products
Fruits, and Vegetables
Cereals and Bakery
Household Utilities
Tobacco
Shelter and Other Realty
Apparel
Autos, Parts, and Repair
Sugar and Confections
•
68.5
16.3
2.4
2.1
1.7
1.2
.9
.9
.8
.6
95.4%
5.4
2.5
2.5
2.2
3.9
1.2
11.4
5.7
8.9
.5
41.7%
(10)
(9)
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(2)
(1)
Dissolved Solids (84,179 million Ibs.)
(10) Toiletry Items
(9) Laundry and Cleaning Supplies
(8) Drugs and Medical Equipment
(7) Apparel
(6) Meat, Poultry and Eggs
(5) Autos, Parts, and Repair
(4) Household Paper Supplies
(3) Dairy Products
(2) Medical Services
(1) Insurance
15.8
11.4
10.8
10.3
5.1
5.1
3.7
2.7
2.6
2.6
70.1%
2.7
2.0
1.3
5.7
5.4
8.9
.3
2.5
5.9
10.4
45.1%
*Pollution index used to derive aggregate rank scores is dis-
cussed in Section 4.0.
15
-------
TABLE 1 (Cont.)
WATER POLLUTANTS
Phosphate Compounds (8,751 million Ibs.)
(10)
(9)
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Consumer Items
*Meat, Poultry and Eggs
Dairy Products
Fruits and Vegetables
Cereals and Bakery
Medical Services
Apparel
Tobacco
Fats and Oils
Insurance
Autos/ Parts, and Repair
Percent
of Total
Pollution
73.6
16.9
2.1
1.3
.9
.8
.5
.5
.5
.3
97.4%
Percent of
Aggregate Consump-
tion Expenditures
5.4
2.5
2.5
2.2
5.9
5.7
1.2
.5
10.4
8.9
45.2%
Waste Water (66,344 billion gallons)
Meat, Poultry and Eggs
Fruits and Vegetables
Dairy Products
Cereals and Bakery
Fats and Oils
Apparel
Tobacco
Sugar and Confections
Autos, Parts, and Repair
Alcoholic Beverages
30.1
20.5
10.4
7.5
5.4
5.3
4.9
1.7
1.3
1.1
88.2%
5.4
2.5
2.5
2.2
.5
5.7
1.2
.5
8.9
1.2
30.6%
(10)
(9)
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
(10)
(9)
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Nitrogen (24,436 million Ibs.)
Meat, Poultry and Eggs
Dairy Products
Fruits and Vegetables
Cereals and Bakery
Medical Services
Apparel
Tobacco
Fats and Oils
Insurance
Autos, Parts, and Repair
72.9
16.8
2.4
1.4
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.3
97.3%
5.4
2.5
2.5
2.2
5.9
5.7
1.2
.5
10.4
8.9
45.2%
*Pollution index used to derive aggregate rank scores is dis-
cussed in Section 4.0.
16
-------
TABLE
AIR POLLUTANTS (1970)
Particulates (28,401 million Ibs.)
Consumer Items
(10)* Household Utilities
(9) Autos, Parts, and Repair
(8) Meat, Poultry and Eggs
(7) Apparel
(6) Toiletry Items
(5) Dairy Products
(4) Shelter and Other Realty
(3) Insurance
(2) Cereals and Bakery
(1) Laundry and Cleaning Supplies
Percent
of Total
Pollution
17.8
10.6
7.0
5.6
4.3
3.9
3.8
3.7
3.4
3.1
63.2%
Percent of
Aggregate Consump-
tion Expenditures
3.9
8.9
5.4
5.7
2.7
2.5
11.4
10.4
2.2
2.0
55.1%
Nitrous Oxides (11,171 million Ibs.)
(10) Household Utilities
(9) Autos, Parts, and Repair
(8) Insurance
(7) Apparel
(6) Meat, Poultry and Eggs
(5) Shelter and Other Realty
(4) Toiletry Items
(3) Medical Services
(2) Footwear and Accessories
(1) Laundry and Cleaning Supplies
•
41.7
7.2
5.2
4.6
3.8
3.1
3.0
2.5
2.2
2.2
75.5%
3.9
8.9
10.4
5.7
5.4
11.4
2.7
5.9
1.8
2.0
58.1%
Carbon Monoxide (9,231 million Ibs.)
(10) Autos, Parts, and Repair
(9) Shelter and Other Realty
(8) Meat, Poultry and Eggs
(7) Toiletry Items
(6) Household Paper Supplies
(5) Apparel
(4) Insurance
(3) Newspapers
(2) Laundry and Cleaning Supplies
(1) Dairy Products
33.7
16.7
3.9
3.7
3.3
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.5
75.3%
8.9
11.4
5.4
2.7
.3
5.7
10.4
.5
2.0
2.5
49.8%
^Pollution index used to derive aggregate rank scores is dis-
cussed in Section 4.0.
17
-------
TABLES (cont.)
AIR POLLUTANTS (1970)
Hydrocarbons (17,620 million Ibs.)
(10)
(9)
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Consumer Items
* Autos f Parts, and Repair
Shelter and Other Realty
Meat, Poultry and Eggs
Apparel
Insurance
Dairy Products
Toiletry Items
Fruits and Vegetables
Cereals and Bakery
Medical Services
Percent
of Total
Pollution
30.4
14.7
7.0
5.4
3.8
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.6
2.3
74.9%
Percent of
Aggregate Consump-
tion Expenditures
8.9
11.4
5.4
5.7
10.4
2.5
2.7
2.5
2.2
5.9
57.6%
Sulfur Oxides (76,922 million Ibs.)
(10)
(9)
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Apparel
Household Utilities
Autos, Parts, and Repair
Shelter and Other Realty
Insurance
Floor Coverings
Household Textiles
Meat, Poultry and Eggs
Footwear and Accessories
Recreational Transportation
26.2
25.6
9.5
3.7
3.3
3.2
2.8
2.5
1.9
1.7
80.4%
5.7
3.9
8.9
11.4
10.4
.3
.5
5.4
1.8
1.8
50.1%
TABLE 3^r
SOLID WASTE (1970)
Consumer Items
(10) Meat, Poultry and Eggs
(9) Autos, Parts, and Repair
'(8) Shelter and Other Realty
(7) Dairy Products
(6) Household Utilities
(5) Fruits and Vegetables
(4) cereals and Bakery
(3) Apparel
( 2) Tobacco
(1) Fats and Oils
Percent
of Total
Pollution
31.0
17.8
9.1
8.3
7.1
5.7
2.7
2.Q
1.7
1.5
86.8%
Percent of
Aggregate Consump-
tion Expenditures
5.4
8.9
11.4
2.5
3.9
2.5
2.2
5.7
1f\
.2
.5 ,
44.2%
*Pollution index used to derive aggregate rank scores is dis-
cussed in Section 4.0.
18
-------
SECTION VI
CONSUMER POLLUTANTS
In the preceding tables it is apparent that many
categories re-appear consistently among the top 10 for each
pollutant type. In order to specify more precisely both
the frequency and position of occurance in these 10 top
categories, the summed ranks for all 12 pollutants were
used to derive an aggregate pollution index for each
consumer category. The rank ordering was found to be:
Name Score *
Meat Poultry and Eggs 99
Apparel 72
Autos, Parts, and Repair 68
Dairy Products 65
Shelter, and Other Realty 46
Fruits and Vegetables 44
Household Utilities 41
Cereals and Bakery 40
Toiletry Items 38
Insurance 32
Laundry and Cleaning supplies 19
Tabacco 19
Medical Services 18
Drugs and Medical Equipment 13
Fats and Oils 13
Household Paper 10
Sugar and Confections 5
Floor Coverings 5
Household Textiles 4
Footwear and Accessories 4
Newspapers , 3
Alcoholic Beverages 1
Recreational Transportation 1
These categories, then, can be looked at as
contributing a major portion of pollution in the U.S.
economy. Thus, consumption patterns for these items become
the focal point in any discussion of reducing pollution by
reduction of consumption of highly polluting items.
Consumption patterns for three main classifications will be
examined: income, age-of-head of household, and region of
the U.S. These classifications for analysis of consumption
patterns were chosen as indicators of the major differential
consumer groups in the U.S. society. An analysis of these
three sets of consumer groups will indicate the differential
consumer patterns which influence market decisions, and thus
*Scores were obtained by summing ranks shown in Tables 3.1-3.3
(the maximum possible score is 120).
19
-------
differential methods of reducing pollution by affecting
consumption patterns. In the analysis of the three groups
which follows, it became apparent that only two of the
groups—income and age-of-head of household—revealed major
differences which were important indicators of buying habits
which could be affected by policy decisions. Regional
differences revealed no significant differences which were
not accounted for in the analysis of the two other groups.
Figure 3 looks at pollution contributed by each income
group for each of these 10 highest polluting items. It is
obvious that the two highest income groups (which together
include persons who earn over $10,000 per year) by their
consumption of these ten items, over-contribute to the
pollution problem. These two groups, comprising only 44% of
the population, contribute an average 65% of the total
pollution for these 10 items. The two lowest income groups,
(which together include those who earn under $5000 per year)
representing 29% of the population, contribute approximately
10% of the pollution: With respect to consumer items it is
apparent that the lowest income groups contribute heavily to
food and shelter items; the items in which the highest
income groups contribute most are insurance, apparel, autos
and toiletries—more apparent luxury items.
Figure 4 examines pollution contribution for each
consumer item by age-of-head of household. Looking at the
graph of average aggregate expenditures, it appears that the
groups with age-of-head of household 25-54 "over-consume"
compared to their relative size in the population.
Especially high are the groups from age 35-54 which comprise
38% of the population but average 49% of the aggregate
consumption expenditures and therefore 49% of the pollution
contribution. The group with age-of-head of household 55-64
contributes an average 17% of the consumption expenditures
and is 17% of the population. The two extreme groups, with
heads of household under 25 and over 65, both "under-consume"
relative to their size in the population. The over 65 age
group is especially notable, as it comprises 19% of the
population but averages only 7% of the aggregate consumption
expenditures. The highest proportional expenditures for
this over 65 group, are in food and shelter commodities,
while the highest proportional expenditures for age groups
35-54 are in apparel, insurance, and toiletries. Thus, if a
reduction in pollution is desired through a reduction in
consumption expenditures, it seems obvious that attention
should be focused on those groups who consume most heavily,
that is, households in which the a.ge-of-head of household is
25-54.
Figure 5 compares regional consumption expenditure
differences (see Appendix for map of regional divisions).
Relative to their proportions in the population, the Northeast
and Northcentral regions over-consume. Comprising 24 and 27%
of the population respectively, they contribute 27 and 29% of
the consumption expenditures, and therefore of the pollution.
20
-------
SECTION VII
PERSONAL CONSUMPTION ITEMS
The purpose of the consumption model of pollution
generation is to assign responsibility for pollution both to
decision makers in production, and to consumers who demand
the final products. Viewed from this perspective, there are
essentially two ways in which to lower pollution: 1) to make
changes in production methods or materials; and 2) alter
consumption patterns. The following section will deal with
consumption patterns of the ten highest polluting categories
of personal consumption goods, and some of the issues
involved in making changes in consumption patterns.
The ten categories of personal consumption items fall
into two basic consumption patterns. Meat, Poultry, and
Eggs; Dairy Products, Fruits and Vegetables, Cereals and
Bakery, Toiletry items, Household Utilities, and Shelter
and Other Realty constitute the first consumption pattern
group, and Auto Parts and Repair, Apparel and Insurance,
the second. Each of these consumption pattern groups will
be examined [see Figures 6-10] according to consumption
patterns which emerge for income and age-of-head of house-
hold groups.
Of the ten top ranking categories of personal consump-
tion items scored in Section 4.0, four of them are foods:
1) meat, poultry and eggs, 2) dairy products, 3) fruits and
vegetables and 4) cereals and bakery. The consumption pat-
terns for all four categories of these personal consumption
goods are similar. As income rises, the average dollars
spent per household per year for these food categories
increases. However, as income increases, the average
proportion of the household budget spent on each food cate-
gory decreases. Personal food consumption tends to be
relatively inelastic in- terms of quantity (calories) an
individual consumes. The relative inelasticity would account
for the proportionate decrease. Thus it appears that
increases in expenditures for food reflects the buying of
better quality foods which tend to be more expensive. This
does not discount the probability of an increase in quantity
food buying, though this would appear to be slight. As will
be noted below, this increase in quantity buying will often
be due to increased size of the family unit, which shows a
high correlation with an increase in income. Thus the key
issue raised in this respect is whether quality food pro-
ducts which generally demand higher prices are more pollut-
ing than food products of lesser quality of lesser expense.
Determination of this issue will be essential to any wise
decision in regard to alteration in consumption patterns of
food products.
For the four food consumption categories, by age-of-head
of household, average dollars spent per household per year is
less for groups with the age-of-head of household under 25
21
-------
and over 65, with the maximum amount being spent by the group
with age of head 35-44. The proportion of the household
budget is similar for all age groups, with a slight increase
noted in the 65 and over age group. These consumption
patterns basically reflect normal increase in family size and
its decrease as the family grows up. Heads of households
under 25 years old or over 65 reflect the times in life when
families are just beginning to grow or after the children
have left their families leaving parents alone. The 35-44
age groups of heads of households is the time when persons
find their maximum number of children at home. This appears
to account for most of the expenditure patterns by age of
household.
Both the age-of-head of household and the income level
consumption patterns for the four food categories reflect no
excessive over-consumption by any group. The foods in these
four personal consumption categories are considered basic
necessities, of which consumption cannot be cut below a
certain point without affecting health. It would appear that
changes in production methods and materials will be the more
effective way of dealing with pollution from the food
categories than trying to alter their consumption patterns.
The consumption patterns for toiletries are similar to
the patterns for the food categories. As income increases,
total dollars spent on toiletries increases, and the propor-
tion of total budget decreases, but at a lesser rate than on the
decrease noted on food categories. These patterns are
consistent in regard to demand changes because of family size
increase and quality, as has been explained in previous
paragraphs. However, it appears that the demand curves for
toiletries is relatively elastic thus indicating much of
toiletries consumption is not of an "essential" type. Such
would indicate that alteration of consumption patterns in
this category would be an effective means of pollution
reduction.
The third major category in the first consumption
pattern group is shelter categories which include: 1) shelter
and other realty and 2) home utilities. As with the four
food categories, as income increases, the average dollars
spent increases, and the proportion of the total family budget
spent on shelter and utilities decreases. But this propor-
tional decrease falls at a faster rate than food categories,
and the dollars spent increases at a slightly faster rate.
The consumer groups with age-of-head of household between
25-64 spend the highest dollar amounts and the lowest
proportion of household budget on shelter. Only the under
25 age-of-head of household group spends a lower proportion
on home-?utilities. There does exist, as noted before, a
high correlation with age-of-head of household, income level
and family size. Responsibility for increased family size
and increasing income level as age increases reflects a
consistent expenditure pattern in the shelter categories.
22
-------
However, expenditures for housing has a relatively elastic
demand curve. Thus, although increases in family size
significantly effect housing expenditures, it seems
apparent that, as income increases, persons tend to buy
more expensive and better quality homes. Life styles
emphasizing nice things may influence much of the increase
in expenditures for quality housing but, undoubtedly,
present tax laws in regard to interest and depreciation
deduction account for much of the motivation to increase
an individual expenditure in shelter categories. To alter
consumption patterns in shelter categories some changes in
tax laws will be necessary. An issue which must be resolved
is the relative amount of pollution the production of an
expensive home results in, versus cheaper housing. A prob-
lem comes forth in this regard in that the price of the land
may be a greater influence on a home's value than the
structure itself. Another issue is what constitutes over-
consumption in shelter? The rapid rise in dollars spent on
shelter and utilities would seem to indicate that, while
consumption cannot be cut below a certain minimal point,
there is room for a lowering of consumption of the highest
income groups and middle age-of-head of household groups,
while allowing them to maintain some degree of higher spend-
ing and greater comfort.
There are three other personal consumption categories
which must be discussed. These are apparel, autos and
insurance. These products will be discussed separately for
two reasons. First, they are generally non-necessity items,
and second, their consumption patterns are such that they
are more susceptible to changes which would lower pollution.
Two of these three consumption categories which have
similar consumption patterns are apparel and insurance.
The average dollars spent per household in the categories
increases at an extremely rapid rate as income increases.
As income increases, the proportion of the household budget
spent on apparel also increases. The total dollars spent
on the categories is the highest for the age groups 25-54
and these three age groups also spend the highest relative
proportions of their budget on apparel and insurance. The
over 65 age group spends much less proportionally and in
actual dollars on insurance and apparel. The patterns for
income and age of head of household are consistent because
of the high correlation between the two. Though at some
minimal level the demand curve for apparel may be inelastic,
the demand curve above this minimum is relatively elastic.
Thus, it seems clear that increases i"h both quantity and
quality of. apparel.take place as income level increases.
No doubt much could be done to alter consumption patterns
in apparel to reduce pollution (if such is deemed desirable);
however, the real issue is which varieties of fabrics
actually result in greater pollution. For example, does
growing cotton, which requires fertilizer and pesticides,
cause more damage than manufacturing synthetic materials
which uses many chemicals?
23
-------
Families tend to purchase more expensive homes and
more automobiles (i.e., second cars) as their income levels
rise. To provide for family security and prevent possible
financial ruin in case of an accident, one insures his house,
automobiles and life. The more valuable one's home or cars,
the more insurance is paid; and the higher one's income
level, the higher one's price for insurance. This also
increases with age. Though these consumption patterns could
be altered easily, some other method of providing financial
security would have to be devised if that alteration is to
be acceptable.
The final consumption category of importance is auto
purchase, parts, and repairs. The proportion of a budget
spent on autos increases through income- levels $500-7500 and
remains fairly constant until income groups bver $15,000-
where the proportion decreases. Total dollars spent on autos
by age-of-head of household is highest for age groups 25-54.
Proportion of budget spent on autos is highest for those
under 25 with the proportion decreasing as age increases.
The young who are just beginning to earn their livlihood
have lower median incomes than those in the prime years of
employment. The youngest age groups have greater desires
for mobility (especially compared to the over 65 age groups)
and thus are willing to spend a much greater proportion of
their budget on auto purchases. Data reveal that the number
of autos owned' increases as income increases. This raises
the issue of whether two or three cars per household consti-
tute over-consumption. Another issue in regard to automo-
biles consumption is whether the cheaper or more expensive
cars are the greatest polluters. Factors involved in this
determination are quantity of parts in the auto, processes
used to make the parts, efficiency of its engines and amount
of energy consumed. However, it is clear that alteration
of auto consumption could have a noticeable effect on pollu-
tion reduction.
Whether some mechanism should be sought to alter
personal consumption patterns to aid in the reduction of
pollution is a personal decision to change one's life style
or a governmental policy decision. This analysis has sought
to provide some understanding of where the consumption
patterns affect the pollution in the nation. It seems clear
that products contributing the greatest pollution are those
which are essential to health. Thus any change in consump-
tion patterns will have to take place among specific food
substitutes rather than between food categories. Other
high polluting products reflect personal desire for comfort
and economic security. To alter consumption patterns these
areas should be somewhat easier than in essential food
categories but nevertheless will be difficult even if deemed
to be desirable because adequate substitutes must be provided.
A note should be made in regard to the significance of
over-consumption by the higher income levels. Because these
income levels are so small in relationship to the massive
middle class that, for policy making, little consideration
should be given to the consumption levels of very high or
24
-------
very low income groups. It is the consumption patterns of
America's middle class that has the greatest effect with
respect to pollution. National policy must look at the
forces causing this if we are to use alteration of consump-
tion patterns as a tool to bring about a reduction in
pollution.
There are three important limitations which must be
considered in this type of consumption-pollution analysis.
The first is the masking of highly polluting industries.
By the nature of the input-output analysis which was used
to determine the pollution caused in the total process of
production of final consumer goods, some of the most highly
polluting industries did not appear on the final list of the
top ten polluting categories primarily because a good portion
of their production was inter-industry production. Thus,
the pollution which these industries caused was distributed
over those consumer items to which they contributed.
Examples of this can be seen in the paper, auto, or electri-
cal energy g'enerating industries. Although each of these
industries contributes heavily to the pollution problem in
the U.S., the products which they produce for the final
consumer is a small part of their total output. A major
portion of their output is delivered to other industrial
producers, and it is to these final producers that the
pollution is allocated. This becomes especially important
for the policy maker, who is trying to determine possible
trade-offs in consumer items, and who must recognize all
contributing factors to pollution of any of the possible
substitute items.
The second limitation deals, with imports and exports.
By the nature of the data used to develop the pollution
figures, all pollution which was generated in the United
States, and only that pollution is included. In terms of
our model this means that all pollution which was caused in
the production of goods (subsequently exported from the
U.S.), is still included in our model, and was distributed
over the total amount of goods purchased in the U.S. On
some items, which were heavily exported, this would mean
that the pollution caused per dollar of item bought was
higher than it should have been. On the other hand, the
pollution caused in production of goods made outside the
U.S., then imported and sold in the U.S., is not included
in the model. For the purposes of this report, the
assumption was made that these two amounts of pollution
balanced out. Testing the validity of this assumption was
beyond the scope of this project. It is, however, an area
which should be considered in any further investigation.
The final area of concern, deals with the spatial
distribution of pollution. One of the most important
variables in pollution severity is the concentration or
dispersion of pollution sources. If the pollution is
dispersed over wide areas the natural ecological system can
deal with the pollution naturally without undue harm. Pollu-
tion problems are amplified by the concentration of pollution
in small spatial areas, where problems of interaction of
25
-------
pollutants, as well as the mere concentration of the pollu-
tants, puts great strains on the environment. The data
which were used in preparing this report did not allow us
to deal with the problems of spatial distribution of
pollution, but only with total amounts of pollutant which
were put into the environment by various industrial processes
It is well to be aware, that while the total amount of
pollution contributed by various consumer items is extremely
important, the policy maker must be aware of the spatial
distributions which come into play.
26
-------
- SECTION VIII
REQUIRED WORK ON CONSUMER PRODUCT USAGE
The second major component of the consumption model is
that of usage of the product by the consumer. A brief
investigation of these areas of consumer product usage—
water, electrical energy and transportation— indicated that
the magnitude of the effort required to adequately evaluate
pollution impact of consumer product usage was not within the
capability of our research due to time and resource limita-
tions, as well as difficulty of obtaining readily available
pertinent data. However, a number of generalizations
developed from our brief investigations, which, though not
adequately supported by thorough research, should be noted
as areas which need further substantiation by empirical
research.
It does not appear that residential and household water
consumption contributes significantly to pollution. Water,
however, is a primary carrier of pollutants, and a few house-
hold polluting agents are carried away from the home by water.
Chief among these are residues of laundry detergents, (pri-
marily phosphates), and suspended solids and organic matter
from home food waste disposals. Water delivery systems,
water-using appliances and waste water disposal systems add
to pollution by their consumption of electricity. Variations
exist among socio-economic classes due to the higher income
groups' possession of more water, and waste water disposal
using appliances. However, regional variations are not
significant with respect to pollution impact.1
Almost every home in the United States is wired for
electrical energy use. Electrical energy, at the point of
household consumption is non-polluting but at the site of
generation, (by fossil-fuel fired power plants), it results
in significant amounts of pollution. In the United States
in 1970, 81% of electrical power was generated by the burning
of fossil fuel.2
The residential sector in 1970 consumed approximately
25% of the total electrical energy consumed in the United
States.3 Space heating, water heating, cooking, and refri-
geration account for more than 80% of the residential usage.
Space heating is the foremost user of electrical energy,
consuming over 50% of residential electricity used.4
A number of factors appear to affect regional variations
iii the pollution impact of electrical energy generation.
First is the population density. The number of units using
electricity is a function of this density. The second is
climate, which is reflected in the high concentration of air
conditioners in warmer regions of the nations and the greater
use of heating systems in colder regions. A third factor is
the type of energy use to generate electricity in the area.
In the Northeast and Northcentral regions, where much high
sulphur content coal is used, pollution is generally greater,
particularly sulphur pollution. In the West, much of the
electricity is generated by hydro-electric plants; thus,
27
-------
little air pollution occurs. In addition, low-sulphur coal
is available in the West? thus, air pollution from coal-
fired power plants is relatively less than in other areas.
A limited amount of reliable data is available on
ownership and use of both water-using and electricity-
consuming appliances by various socio-economic classes.
There are, however, indications that significant variations
exist among income groups in regard to ownership of house-
hold appliances even though refrigerators and television
sets are found in nearly all of the homes in the United
States.5
The primary energy source of the transportation systems
in the United States is fossil fuels. The combustion of
fossil fuels result in emission of pollutants directly from
the exhaust systems of the motor vehicles and airplanes.
Some pollution results from electrical energy consumed by
subways," and elevated and surface commuter trains.
It is apparent that income levels have a significant
effect on the type of transport system people use. One
major factor is the high cost of personal automobiles and
the relatively expensive fares of some transportation sys-
tems in comparison with others. Indications are that owner-
ship of an automobile (and number of automobiles owned)
increases with income level.6 This affects the total miles
traveled by a household and thus influences pollution contri-
bution of that family. Also, it appears that bus travel
decreases and airplane travel increases as income level
increases. This is no doubt due to low income groups being
unable to afford expensive airline fares and the expense
of traveling long distances. Social variations also exist,
presumably because a high correlation exists between income
level and occupation and education. However, regional varia-
tions in pollution attributed to using transportation systems
can also be accounted for by its high correlation with popu-
lation density in the area.
There are other important factors which must be
analyzed to understand the impact of the use of transporta-
tion systems by socio-economic classes. Among these are
percentages of pollutants by weight emitted by each type of
transport, number of passengers carried per transport unit,
and person-miles traveled in each type of transport.
The solid waste component of the consumption model con-
stitutes the final stage of product flow from raw material
growth (or extraction) to disposal. Solid waste generated
in the industrial and agricultural production of consumer
items has been taken into consideration in the production
component of the model. The remaining part of the solid
waste component to be treated is the solid waste generated
by the residential sector. A survey of available literature
in the area of differential residential generation of solid
waste reveals that only a very limited amount of pertinent
research has been compiled; as a result, no national generali-
zations could be drawn. However, a regional study of the
28
-------
quality and quantity of residential solid waste generation,
which was in progress at the time of printing this report,
should provide some much needed data.
29
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. F.P. Linaweaver, Jr., John C. Geyer, and Jerome B. Wolff,
Final and Summary Report on the Residential Water Use
Research Project, Report V on Phase Two of the Residential
Water Use Research Project. (The project was conducted during
the period from October 1961 to June 1966 by the John Hopkins
University under the Technical Studies Program of the Federal
Housing Administration in cooperation with sixteen partici-
pating water utilities located throughout the United States)
June, 1966.
2. Electrical Energy Association (EEA), The Comparative
Environmental Impact in 1980 of Fossil Fuel Space Heating
Systems Versus Electric Space Heating, Figure 2.8, pp. 11-20,
(Prepared by Gordian Associates, Inc., N.Y., N.Y.) March,
1972.
3. Federal Power Commission (FPC), The 1970 National Power
Survey—Part I, Table 1.1, "Categories of Electric Power
Use—1965-1970-1990," p. 1-1-3 (U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C.) December, 1971.
4. Stanford Research Institute (SRI), Patterns of Energy
Consumption in the United States, p. 33~r (A Report Prepared
for the Energy Policy Staff, Office of Science and Technology,
Office of the President, Washington, D.C.) Menlo Park,
California, January, 1972.
5. Bureau of Census, Consumer Buying Indicators, Household
Ownership and Availability of Cars, Homes, and Selected
Household Durables and Annual Expenditures on Cars and Other
Durables; 1971, Department of Commerce Publication, Series
P-65, No. 40, May 1972.
6. George Katona, Lewis Mandell, and Jay Schmiedeskamp,
1970 Survey of Consumer Finances (Ann Arbor: Braun-Brumfield,
Inc., 1971) p. 68.The real numbers for the total of each
breakdown of the survey for Table 4-7, p. 68, were obtained
from Jay Schiedeskamp in a phone conversation. These were
used to arrive at the percentages for the income groups used
throughout this report.
30
-------
SECTION IX
A THEORETICAL INPUT-OUTPUT MODEL FOR HOUSEHOLD CONSUMPTION
A consumptive model of the U.S. economy and its resultant
pollution addresses itself to a fundamental concern. It
attempts to shed some light on the causes of pollution by
uniquely looking at household consumption and the causal chain
of the flow of raw materials to eventual solid waste pollution.
In this chain the consumer plays the earlier critical role in
his exercise of demand for a seemingly ever-expanding supply
of consumer products. Consumer demand, then, suggests an
innovative area of environmental inquiry as well as a hint of
irresponsible and contributory performance to the pollution
problem.
Moreover, another suggestion that surfaces during this
causal chain of consumer demand-raw material-final product-
consumer usage-waste and disposal is that national energy
resources as well as raw material resources are being con-
sumed by this consumer decision. Not only are the questions
of "what does the consumer buy" and "how does he dispose of
it" important, but also how and to what extent does energy
service it during its useful life. Indeed, pollution can be
viewed from a multivaried perspective of consumer demand.
IX.A Purpose of Model
The purpose of a theoretical input-output model for
household consumption is to suggest a methodology to assess
differential pollutants and their sources. Through an approach
to quantification and subsequent measurement the effects of
household pollution can be traced from consumer buying patterns
through product utilization habits and their accompanying
energy usages to the eventual waste or disposal of the pro-
ducts consumed.
In attempting to set up a consumptive model of pollution,
it was found that information on one essential component of
the model, i.e., differential usage of products, was unavail-
able. In setting up a "consumptive" model these data play an
important, if not essential part in understanding the consumers
role in pollution generation, both industrially and personally.
IX.S Model Description
A theoretical input-output model (as shown in Table
4 for household consumption would.address the causal chain
of consumer demand-raw material-final product-consumer usage-
waste and disposal-. In our conceptual model, consumer demand
and raw material utilization result in a final product which
is purchased or otherwise obtained by the household. This
series of activities can be viewed as the input into the
household consumption model and constitute the initial house-
hold decision. Their basic parameters are products purchased
and household profiles. Questions on product purchases
attempt to seek data for:
31
-------
TABLE 4
CONCEPTUAL INPUT-OUTPUT MODEL FOR HOUSEHOLD CONSUMPTION
INPUT
OUTPUT
Household
Parameters
Household
Acquisition
Of Product
Impact Dimensions
During Usage
After Usage
Income Levels
Age Levels
Regional Locales
U)
to
Frequency of
Purchase
Quantity of
Purchase
Quality of
Products Purchased
Nature of
Products Purchased
Efficiency of
Product
Method or Type
Of Usage
Completeness of
Usage
Frequency and
Duration of Usage
Repair and Upkeep
of Product
Energy Consumption
of Product
• Type
• Quantity
Quantity of Solid
Waste
Nature of Materials To
Be Disposed
• Biodegradable
• Non-biodegradable
Method of Disposal
Recyclability of
Product Materials
-------
• nature of products purchased
• quantity of products purchased
• quality of products purchased
• frequency of purchase
Household profile information qualifies or conditions
the product-purchase picture as it seeks data on household
composition by:
• income levels
• age levels
• regional locales
Presumably, a differential picture begins to emerge.
That is, different groups buy different products in different
quantities in different sections of the country, at different
times, etc. For example, it would answer such questions as
which income groups purchase the highest quality TV sets,
how many do they purchase, and how often? This information
would be tied in with information on differential pollution
by types or brands purchased and from this would begin to
develop differential consumption-pollution patterns by groups,
Subsequently, there is an output or a series of impact
dimensions that arise as a result of the initial household
decision. These impact dimensions are activities that basic-
ally occur (1) during usage and (2) after usage.
The "during usage" stage incorporates both performance
stage and the energy consumption stage. Basically, how long
and how effective is the product being utilized and what
energy is being expended to keep.it in operation? Product
utility questions seek the following information:
efficiency of product
type or method of usage
completeness of usage
frequency and duration of usage
repair and upkeep of product
energy consumption of product (by type and quantity
of energy)
These impact dimensions would begin to qualify the earlier
basic product-and-household data. For example, it could be
hypothesized that poorer people contribute more to pollution
by purchasing lower cost (and quality) TV sets, because:
• companies producing TV sets at minimal cost may
use more polluting production methods to minimize
costs;
• efficiency of the TV set may be poor, thus demanding
. higher.quantities of electrical energy to operate;
• quality of the set may be poor, requiring more
frequent and extensive repair or upkeep, thus
demanding more production of replacement parts.
33
-------
The second and last impact dimension would deal with
the product or its wastage after usage. This data search
would presumably convey back the information of actual
pollution:
• quantity of solid waste
• nature of materials to be disposed (biodegradable
or non-biodegradable)
• method of disposal (home incineration; sewer
system, garbage disposal, public garbage
collection)
• recyclability of product materials
Again, this information would begin to assess differential
pollution in the sense that, even though lower income groups
may purchase fewer TV sets, on the whole they may contribute
more to solid waste because the quality of the product they
purchase may force them to dispose of it more quickly with
less use. On the other hand, this data analysis would bring
in the added dimension of second-hand products. That is,
while the higher income classes may contribute to less solid
waste pollution directly from disposal of heavy appliances
because they are re-sold to lower income groups, they are in
some sense responsible for the solid waste created after
final usage and disposal.
This informational dimension would also help to indicate
differences in disposal methods, e.g., garbage disposals vs.
garbage collection for food wastes, and differences in pro-
duct material composition in products purchased by groups
which would contribute to easier recyclability into the indus-
trial or total environmental system.
Very closely connected with this information, would be
a computer simulation of tradeoff implications in consump-
tion items. This would include evaluation of probable or
possible tradeoffs in consumer items (necessitating a much
more complete breakdown of consumption category), differen-
1^Lal pollution generation in production of tradeoff items
(or tradeoff materials), diffusion or concentration of
sources of pollution, and differential possibilities of
affecting these tradeoffs among consumer groups.
Again, findings of these two studies would presumably
either substantiate or obviate the initial household pur-
chase decision, if this would be judged to be a valuable
objective for policy study.
34
-------
SECTION X
APPENDIX
Derivation of Consumption-Production Categories
The consumption data from the National Conference Board
divided final consumption items into eight general categories
of consumption. Each in turn, is broken down into very detailed
expenditures for each group, e.g., food, beverages and tobacco
is broken down into 196 categories, sufficiently detailed to
allow reaggregation into new categories of consumption con-
sistent with the final demand categories from the model.
Out of the 185 Almon production sectors, 126 are classi-
fied as final consumption sectors. Each of. these 126 sectors
is described by the SIC numbers which apply to that sector.
Thus the first step in determining the composition of each
sector was to obtain a detailed description of the products
which came from industries described, and to develop a list
of those products from each sector which would go to final
consumption and those which were interindustry products. At
this point, a comparison of the product usage descriptions
was made with the consumption categories from the NCB and an
initial definition of our production-consumption sectors was
made, keeping in mind the desirability of maintaining as many
consumption categories as possible in order to explore more
carefully the differential consumption patterns of income,
age, and regional groups, and also keeping in mind the fact
that categories must be aggregate enough to satisfy definitions
of inclusions in each final demand and consumption sector.
On the basis of this information an original classification
of sectors by product usage was made in conjunction with con-
sumption categories from the National Conference Board and
sectors which were not easily classified were noted for fur-
ther consideration.
The sectors which could not easily be classified after
this primary assessment fell into two general categories.
First, sectors whose final "consumption" products were not
immediately apparent and secondly, sectors in which final
products fell clearly into two or more different consumtive
sectors. In solving these problems, two basic sources of
information were used:
1. A list of five digit SIC product shipments adjusted
for exports and imports for 1958 to 1969 were made
available from Bureau of Business and Economic Re-
search at the University of Maryland. This list
gives millions of dollars of products shipped from
each 5-digit SIC code industry for 1967 and a coef-
ficient which gives the proportion of that shipment
which went to personal consumption expenditures.1
2. A list of "Industrial Composition of Personal Con-
sumption by PCE Category, in Producers' and Purchas'-
er's Prices, 1963,"2 published by the U.S. Depart-
35
-------
ment of Commerce, Office of Business Economics.
This gives the final consumption items which are
delivered from each industry to personal consump-
tion (classified by the industry classification
used in the 1963 Input-Output Study of the Survey
of Current Business).
To determine the final "consumption" from problem sectors,
a description of each sector by 5-digit SIC code was made. In
sectors where final products fell into two or more different
consumptive categories, the 5-digit classification was suffi-
cient to divide the sector into its various final consumptive
components. Then using the list of product shipments by 5-
digit SIC code, the sectors were divided by the proportion of
the various consumptive-sectors. Two general types of solutions
were made. First, some sectors of the product categories con-
tained items which could be classified into two consumptive
sectors, e.g., miscellaneous housewares and linoleum, which
would be classified under the consumptive sector labeled floor
coverings. The five digit SIC codes were sufficiently detailed
to allow linoleum production to be removed from the other pro-
ducts. The personal consumption expenditures for linoleum (a
multiplicative product of the 1967 product shipments and the
proportion of those shipments which went to personal consump-
tion) were divided by the total personal consumption expendi-
tures for the entire sector to determine the proportion of that
sector which as to be attributed to miscellaneous housewares
and the proportion which was to be attributed to linoleum.
The second type of solution followed the same procedure,
however when the personal consumption expenditures were cal-
culated, it was'discovered that one of the sectors which re-
quired separation was, in fact, void of personal consumption
expenditures. That is, part of the sector was producting en-
tirely for other interindustry trades. An example of this
was found in the ship and boat repair industry. In trying
to separate ship repair (which would be placed in a consump-
tive sector for long distance ship travel) from boat repair
(which would be placed in a sector for other recreational
travel)/ it was found that the S^C sectors which produced
for the ship industry had coefficients of zero for the per-
sonal consumption expenditures. Thus the final consumption
expenditures for this sector were placed entirely in the pro-
duction-consumption category for other transportation, since
ship repair was not a final consumption item for the sector.
A final type of problem presented itself in the product
category labeled "Broad and Narrow Fabrics." .In this sector,
the 5-digit SIC codes did not sufficiently divide the industry
to allow separation of the final products into fabrics for
apparel and household textiles. The "Industrial Composition
of Personal Consumption Expenditures" data allowed separation
of fabric for apparel from household textiles, by separating
respective purchases for apparel from durable and semi'-durable
36
-------
housefurnishings, which were thus calculated for sectors of the
industry which were delivered to apparel and those delivered
to household textiles.
It is necessary at this point to make clear the assump-
tion which was used in dividing Almon's product categories
into their component consumption parts. The assumption is
that within each product category pollution is created equally.
That is, if a sector is to be divided into different consump-
tive parts, it is assumed that the proportion of dollars of
final product sold to the consumer is equal to the proportion
of pollution created by that part of the sector. Due to time
and resource limitations, it is impossible to test the validi-
ty of this assumption.
37
-------
A. Food
1. Cereals and Bakery Products (2)
a. Grain - 5
b. Grain Mill Products - 26
c. Bakery Products - 27
2. Meat, Poultry and Eggs (29, 122)
a. Poultry and eggs - 2
b. Meat, animals and livestock, beef and hog farms - 3
c. Meat products - 23
3. Fish and Seafood (44)
8,
a. Fish and shellfish - 8
b. Canned and frozen fish - 25
Dairy Products (49)
12%
a. Dairy farm products - 1
b. Dairy products, cream and cheese - 24
5. Fruits arid Vegetables (63, 133, 174)
a. Fruits, vegetables and other crops - 7
b. Canned and frozen fruits and vegetables - 25 88%
Fats and Oils (123)
a. Fats and oils - 32
Sugar and Confectionary (154)
a. Sugar - 28
b. Confectionary products - 29
Misc. Foods (140, 147, 178)
a. Pasta, spices - 33 61%
Beverages (163)
KEY TO LISTING
A to M = Major Consumption-
Production break-
outs.
1 to 48«= Consumption-Prod-
uction categories
used in this report,
based on the Nat-
ional Conference
Board's sectors
identified in par-
enthesis: eg: (2).
a. Soft drinks and flavorings - 31
b. Coffee - 33 39%
B- Alcoholic Beverages
10. Alcoholic Beverages (186)
a. Alcoholic beverages - 30
38
a,b,c,etc.= Equivalent
Clopper
Almon sectors act-
ually used in the
Consumption - Prod-
uction Model which
generated the
results reported
in this document.
-------
C. Tobacco
11. Tobacco Products (192)
a. Tobacco Products - 34
D. Household Operations
12. Shelter and Other Real Estate (3, 7, 22)
a. Sand and gravel, asphalt, clay ceramic -16
b. Cabinets, windows, doors, trim - 43
c. Paints - 68
d. Roofing and painting materials - 69
e. Glass - 78
f. Cement, concrete, gypsum - 81
g. Other stone and clay products - 82
h. Nails and other steel - 83
i. Aluminum - 87
j. Wire - 90
k. Plumbing and heating equipment - 94
1. Structural metal, i.e., doors, platework,
ornamental - 95
m. Screws, bolts - 96
n. Credit agencies, banking, brokers - 165
o. Owner occupied dwellings - 167
p. Real Estate - 168
g. Landscaping - 10
r. Metal stampings - 97
s. Machine tools, dyes - 106, 108
t. Gum and wood chemicals - 61 10%
13. Fuel, light, refrigeration and water (24)
a. Coal - 14
b. Electric utilities - 160
c. Natural gas - 161
d. Water and sewer services - 162
e. State and local electric utilities - 180
14. Lodging outside of home (15, 21)
a. Hotels and lodging places, trailer parks - 169
15. Telephone and other call communication (35)
a. Telephone and telegraph, radio and TV trans-
mitting - 127
b. Call communication - 158
39
-------
16. Laundry and Cleaning Supplies (39, 40, 42, 168)
a. Soaps, detergents - 67 49%
17* Paper Supplies (41)
a. Converted paper products, paperboard - 48
b. Envelopes, tissues and napkins - 49
c. Paperboard containers - 51
18. Writing Supplies, Cards, and Stationary (49)
a. Pens, pencils, and other office supplies - 149
19. Moving, Freight forwarding, and Storage (48)
a. Freight forwarding - 157
b. Trucking - 153
20. Sprays, and Fertilizers (51)
a. Agricultural chemicals - 61 90%
b. Agricultural fertilizers and chemicals - 59
c. Pesticides and disinfectants - 60
d. Chemical fertilizers, phosphates, fluospar - 17
21. General and Repair Services and Supplies (45, 47, 50, 52)
a. Barber and beauty; TV, refrigeration and watch
repair; photo studios - 170
b. Misc. business services, duplication, detective,
bicycle repair, consulting - 171
E. Housefurnishings and Equipment
22. Household Textiles (2)
a. Felt, lace, artificial leather, linen, burlap,
ribbon, yarn - 37
b. Drapes, bags, towels, awnings, sails, embroideries,
diapers - 40
c. Broad and Narrow Fabrics 35 52%
23. Floor Coverings (2 9)
a. Woven and tufted carpets, rugs - 36
b. Linoleum - 150 23%
.'•» .
24. Furniture (17)
a. Furniture, lumber and wood products - 41
b. Household furniture, non-wood - 45
c. Wood and metal partitions, shelving, venitial
blinds - 46
40
-------
25. Appliances (41, 60)
a. Sewing machines, food appliances, wood working
machines, printing - 109
b. Vacuums, dishwashers - 116
c. Household appliances, cooking refrigeration,
laundry, grinders - 123
d. Lamps and lights - 124
e. Mechanical measuring devices, thermostats - 142
f. Generators and motors - 120
26. Kitchenware (65)
a. China, tableware, and other pottery - 80
b. Cutlery - 98 56%
c. Silverware - 147 25%
27. Misc. Housewares (79)
a. Awnings, brush handles, film and tubs, mis. plas-
tics - 74
b. Handtools and other hardware - 98 44%
c. Hangers, springs, barbed wire - 99
d. Engraving, polishing, safes and vaults - 101
e. Farm machinery -< 103
f. Typewriters and balances and other office
machinery - 115
g. Cards, bells and Xmas tree lights - 131
h. Feathers, buttons, pins, brooms, candles - 150 77%
i. Wall light switches, transformers - 119
j. Batteries - 129 2%
k. Industrial chemcials - 55
1. Misc. plastics - 62
m. Clocks - 146 23%
F. Clothing and Materials
28. Apparel (3, 15, 16, 17, 30, 42, 43, 44, 57, 68, 69, 70,
79, 92, 93, 94, 107, 120, 121, 122, 135, 149, 150, 151,
159, 167)
a. Outerware, underware, hosiery (knit goods) - 38
b. Shirts, blouses, coats, suits, furgoods, hats and
caps and gloves - 39
c. Broad and Narrow Fabrics - 3.5 48%
29. Footwear and Accessories (18, 28, 23, 24, 25, 27, 45, 50,
51, 52, 54, 55, 71, 75, 77, 95, 100, 101, 102, 104, 105,
123, 128, 129, 130, 132, 133, 152, 156, 158)
a. Rubberfootwear, bags and baloons - 73
b. Leather footwear - 76
c. ther leather, i.e., luggage, handbags, saddlery - 77
41
-------
30. Jewelry and watches (26, 53, 76, 103, 131, 157)
a. Watches,-- 146 77%
b. Jewelry - 147 75%
G. Transportation
31. Autos, parts and repairs (2, 5, 22, 23)
a. Tires and inner tubes - 72
b. Carburator - 117
c. Batteries - 129 98%
d. Electrical equipment for internal combustion
engines - 130
e. Motor vehicles and parts - 133
'f. Auto repair - 173
g. Gasoline - 69
32. Airlines (27)
a. Private aircraft - 134
b. Aircraft equipment - 136
c. Airlines - 155
33. Railroads (26)
a. Railroads - 151
34. Busses, Intracity and Other Intercity (28, 29, 30, 31,
24, 33)
a. Busses - 152
35. Other Transportation (34, 35, 36, 37)
a. Motorcycles, bicycles and snowmobiles - 139
b. Mobile homes, trailers - 140
c. Boats and repair - 137
d. Outboard motors - 102
H. Medical Care
36. Medical Services (2, 6, 10)
a. Physicians, dentists, chiropractors, rest homes - 175
37. Medical Equipment and Drugs (14, 21)
a. Drugs - 66
b. Optical and ophthalmic - 143
c. Medical and surgical instruments, dental - 144
42
-------
I. Personal Care
38. Toiletry Items (Personal Services and Supplies) 22
a. Perfumes and Cosmetics - 67 51%
J. Recreation
39. TV, Radio, and Musical (2)
a. Radio and TV receiving - 125
b. Phonograph records - 126
c. Radio and TV electric tubes, picture tubes - 128
d. Musical instruments - 148 12%
40. Hobbies and Photography (23)
a. Photographic equipment - 145
41. Sports and Sporting Goods (16, 18, 22)
a. Sporting Equipment - 148 25%
b. Small arms and ammo - 21 and 22
42. Toys and Play Equipment (29)
a. Toys - 148 63%
43. Other Recreation (37, 38, 14, 15, 17)
a. Motion pictures and amusements - 174
K. Reading
4 4. Newspapers (2)
a. Newspaper publishing and Printing - 52
45. Books, magqzines and Periodicals (3, 4, 8)
a. Books, periodicals, misc. - 53
L. Education
46.. Schools (9)
a. Blank books and looseleaf binders - 54
b. Private schools and nonprofit organizations - 176
M. All Other Services
47. Insurance (16, 20)
43
-------
a. Insurance - 166
48. Other Services (14, 28)
a. Advertising, legal, accounting - 172
b. Post office - 177
c. Federal Gov't. Enterprises - 178
44
-------
FOOTNOTES
!• Five.Digit Product Shipments Adjusted for Exports and Im-
ports 1958-69, Inter-Industry Forecasting Project, Bureau of
Business and Economic Research, University of Maryland, College
Park, Maryland.
2. Industrial Composition of Personal Consumption Expenditures,
By PCE Category, in Producers and Purchasers Prices, 1963,
mimeograph from the Inter-Industry Economics Division, Bureau
of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce.
45
-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
1. Re;
w
STUDIES IN ENVIRONMENT - Volume IV - Consumption Differentials
_ and the Environment
Mary Beth Olsen, Ethan Bickelhaupt, Donnie Grimslej
Cherie Lewis, Pamela Scott
Homer Hoyt Institute
Washington, D. C.
12. Sponsoring Qrganizat-'on EnvirOnmental Protection Agency
Environmental Protection Agency report
number EPA-600/5-73-012d, November 1973
S. R ortD
p
Ri, ..-rtNu
r ation
801473
13. Type r Repo: and
Period Covered
Final Report
Fundamentally, pollution is a direct reflection of the behavioral patterns
of the consuming public. IHKXffiffffilXKyWHYHK In order to achieve long lasting positive
reductions of pollutants, basic attitudinal changes must be effected toward what goods
and services are demanded, in what quantities, as well as attitudes toward usage and
disposal of these items. It is this area in which this report makes initial contribu-
tions .
Through the use of a mathematical model, both direct and indiract industrial pollution
generated by fluxuations of the entire economy are tied to behavioral patterns of the
consuming public. The model studies consumer behavior patterns from three viewpoints:
income of family, age of head of family, and regional location of family within the
United States. The methodology relates 126 final consumption industry groupings to 48
consumer item (product) groupings of the National Conference Board's taxonomy. The
heart of the methodology employs the Resources for the Future's "National Pollution
Model", basically an input-output plus residual technique.
Findings focus on most polluting industries, and the pollution associated characteris-
tics of sub-groups of the U.S. population.
17a. Dr:...nptors
Consumer pollution, input-output model, consumption model
17b. Identifiers
John Gerba
19. Sf urityC'iss.
(Keport)
20. Security C/asi
(Fige)
-'/. K.J. Of
Pages
22. Price
Send To:
WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
WASHINGTON. D. C. 2O24O
\ Environmental Protection Agency
* U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1974 731-935/342
------- |