IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v117y2013i1p377-397.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

PM 2.5 co-benefits of climate change legislation part 1: California’s AB 32

Author

Listed:
  • Christina Zapata
  • Nicholas Muller
  • Michael Kleeman

Abstract

The Scoping Plan for compliance with California Assembly Bill 32 (Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006; AB 32) proposes a substantial reduction in 2020 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from all economic sectors through energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other technological measures. Most of the AB 32 Scoping Plan measures will simultaneously reduce emissions of traditional criteria pollutants along with GHGs leading to a co-benefit of improved air quality in California. The present study quantifies the airborne particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) co-benefits of AB 32 by comparing future air quality under a Business as Usual (BAU) scenario (without AB 32) to AB 32 implementation by sector. AB 32 measures were divided into five levels defined by sector as follows: 1) industrial sources, 2) electric utility and natural gas sources, 3) agricultural sources, 4) on-road mobile sources and 5) other mobile sources. Air quality throughout California was simulated using the UCD source-oriented air quality model during 12 days of severe air pollution and over 108 days of typical meteorology representing an annual average period in the year 2030 (10 years after the AB 32 adoption deadline). The net effect of all AB 32 measures reduced statewide primary PM and NO x emissions by ~1 % and ~15 %, respectively. Air quality simulations predict that these emissions reductions lower population-weighted PM 2.5 concentrations by ~6 % for California. The South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) experienced the greatest reductions in PM 2.5 concentrations due to the AB 32 transportation measures while the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) experiences the smallest reductions or even slight increases in PM 2.5 concentrations due to the AB 32 measures that called for increased use of dairy biogas for electricity generation. The ~6 % reduction in PM 2.5 exposure associated with AB 32 predicted in the current study reduced air pollution mortality in California by 6.2 %, avoiding 880 (560–1100) premature deaths per year for the conditions in 2030. The monetary benefit from this avoided mortality was estimated at $5.4B/yr with a weighted average benefit per tonne of $35 k/tonne ($23 k/tonne–$45 k/tonne) of PM, NO x , SO x , and NH 3 emissions reduction. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Christina Zapata & Nicholas Muller & Michael Kleeman, 2013. "PM 2.5 co-benefits of climate change legislation part 1: California’s AB 32," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 377-397, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:117:y:2013:i:1:p:377-397
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-012-0545-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10584-012-0545-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-012-0545-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anil Markandaya & Ben Armstrong & Simon Hales & Aline Chiabai & Patrick Criqui & Silvana Mima, 2009. "Impact on public health of strategies to reduce greenhouse gases : low carbon electricity generation," Post-Print halshs-00459664, HAL.
    2. Viscusi, W Kip & Aldy, Joseph E, 2003. "The Value of a Statistical Life: A Critical Review of Market Estimates throughout the World," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 5-76, August.
    3. Johannes Bollen & Bruno Guay & Stéphanie Jamet & Jan Corfee-Morlot, 2009. "Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation Policies: Literature Review and New Results," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 693, OECD Publishing.
    4. repec:reg:rpubli:282 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. -, 2009. "The economics of climate change," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL para el Caribe (Estudios e Investigaciones) 38679, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Qiang Zhang & Jun Shan & Hai Long, 2022. "Improving Transportation Technologies for Carbon Reduction in the Chinese Provinces along the Silk Road," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-22, April.
    2. Brown, Kristen E. & Henze, Daven K. & Milford, Jana B., 2017. "How accounting for climate and health impacts of emissions could change the US energy system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 396-405.
    3. Michael Kleeman & Christina Zapata & John Stilley & Mark Hixson, 2013. "PM 2.5 co-benefits of climate change legislation part 2: California governor’s executive order S-3-05 applied to the transportation sector," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 399-414, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Moroni, Stefano & Antoniucci, Valentina & Bisello, Adriano, 2016. "Energy sprawl, land taking and distributed generation: towards a multi-layered density," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 266-273.
    2. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    3. Chanel, Olivier & Chichilnisky, Graciela, 2013. "Valuing life: Experimental evidence using sensitivity to rare events," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 198-205.
    4. Bollen, Johannes, 2015. "The value of air pollution co-benefits of climate policies: Analysis with a global sector-trade CGE model called WorldScan," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 178-191.
    5. Mark Delucchi & Don McCubbin, 2011. "External Costs of Transport in the United States," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & De Cian, Enrica & Massetti, Emanuele & Tavoni, Massimo, 2013. "Incentives and stability of international climate coalitions: An integrated assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 44-56.
    7. E. Michel‐Kerjan & S. Hochrainer‐Stigler & H. Kunreuther & J. Linnerooth‐Bayer & R. Mechler & R. Muir‐Wood & N. Ranger & P. Vaziri & M. Young, 2013. "Catastrophe Risk Models for Evaluating Disaster Risk Reduction Investments in Developing Countries," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 984-999, June.
    8. Walter Vergara & Ana R. Rios & Luis Miguel Galindo Paliza & Pablo Gutman & Paul Isbell & Paul Hugo Suding & Joseluis Samaniego, 2013. "The Climate and Development Challenge for Latin America and the Caribbean: Options for Climate-Resilient, Low-Carbon Development," IDB Publications (Books), Inter-American Development Bank, number 80518, February.
    9. Bösch, Matthias & Elsasser, Peter & Rock, Joachim & Rüter, Sebastian & Weimar, Holger & Dieter, Matthias, 2017. "Costs and carbon sequestration potential of alternative forest management measures in Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 88-97.
    10. Fouquet, Roger, 2011. "Long run trends in energy-related external costs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2380-2389.
    11. Delucchi, Mark A. & McCubbin, Donald R., 2010. "External Costs of Transport in the U.S," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt13n8v8gq, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    12. S. Niggol Seo, 2017. "Measuring Policy Benefits Of The Cyclone Shelter Program In The North Indian Ocean: Protection From Intense Winds Or High Storm Surges?," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(04), pages 1-18, November.
    13. Muller, Nicholas Z., 2012. "The design of optimal climate policy with air pollution co-benefits," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 696-722.
    14. Alexis Louaas & Pierre Picard, 2022. "Optimal Nuclear Liability Insurance," The Energy Journal, , vol. 43(1), pages 97-115, January.
    15. Bollen, Johannes & Hers, Sebastiaan & van der Zwaan, Bob, 2010. "An integrated assessment of climate change, air pollution, and energy security policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4021-4030, August.
    16. Stéphane Hallegatte & Jan Corfee-Morlot, 2011. "Understanding climate change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation at city scale: an introduction," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 1-12, January.
    17. Simon Dietz, 2009. "High impact, low probability? An empirical analysis of risk in the economics of climate change," GRI Working Papers 9, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    18. Stéphane Hallegatte & Fanny Henriet & Jan Corfee-Morlot, 2011. "The economics of climate change impacts and policy benefits at city scale: a conceptual framework," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 51-87, January.
    19. Simon Dietz, 2011. "High impact, low probability? An empirical analysis of risk in the economics of climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 519-541, October.
    20. Alexis Louaas & Pierre Picard, 2014. "Optimal Insurance For Catastrophic Risk: Theory And Application To Nuclear Corporate Liability," Working Papers hal-01097897, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:117:y:2013:i:1:p:377-397. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.