IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-03-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Evolution of NOx Control Policy for Coal-Fired Power Plants in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Burtraw, Dallas

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Evans, David

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx ) contribute to formation of particulate matter and ozone, and also to acidification of the environment. The electricity sector is responsible for about 20% of NOx emissions in the United States, and the sector has been the target of both prescriptive (command-and-control) and flexible (cap-and-trade) approaches to regulation. We summarize the major NOx control policies affecting this sector, and provide some perspectives as to their effectiveness. While both prescriptive and flexible approaches continue to play an important role, significant new proposals have wholly embraced a cap-and-trade approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Burtraw, Dallas & Evans, David, 2003. "The Evolution of NOx Control Policy for Coal-Fired Power Plants in the United States," RFF Working Paper Series dp-03-23, Resources for the Future.
    • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-03-23
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-03-23.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Burtraw, Dallas & Cannon, Matthew, 2000. "Heterogeneity in Costs and Second-Best Policies for Environmental Protection," Discussion Papers 10875, Resources for the Future.
    2. Dallas Burtraw & Alan Krupnick & Erin Mansur & David Austin & Deirdre Farrell, 1998. "Costs And Benefits Of Reducing Air Pollutants Related To Acid Rain," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 16(4), pages 379-400, October.
    3. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 27, pages 523-554, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Farrell, Alex & Carter, Robert & Raufer, Roger, 1999. "The NOx Budget: market-based control of tropospheric ozone in the northeastern United States," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 103-124, May.
    5. Krupnick, Alan & McConnell, Virginia & Stoessell, Terrell & Cannon, Matthew & Batz, Michael, 2000. "Cost-Effective NOx Control in the Eastern United States," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-18, Resources for the Future.
    6. Denny Ellerman, 1998. "Note on The Seemingly Indefinite Extension of Power Plant Lives, A Panel Contribution," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    7. Spencer Banzhaf, H. & Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen, 2004. "Efficient emission fees in the US electricity sector," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-341, September.
    8. Williams, Roberton III, 2002. "Environmental Tax Interactions when Pollution Affects Health or Productivity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 261-270, September.
    9. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen L. & Bharvirkar, Ranjit & Paul, Anthony, 2001. "Cost-Effective Reduction of NOx Emissions from Electricity Generation," Discussion Papers 10677, Resources for the Future.
    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. Jonathan M. Lee, 2015. "The Impact of Heterogeneous NOx Regulations on Distributed Electricity Generation in U.S. Manufacturing," Working Papers 15-12, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    2. William A. Pizer, 2005. "The case for intensity targets," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(4), pages 455-462, July.
    3. Curtis, E. Mark & Lee, Jonathan M., 2019. "When do environmental regulations backfire? Onsite industrial electricity generation, energy efficiency and policy instruments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 174-194.
    4. Kruger, Joseph & Pizer, William A., 2004. "The EU Emissions Trading Directive: Opportunities and Potential Pitfalls," Discussion Papers 10679, Resources for the Future.
    5. Craig, Michael & McDonald-Buller, Elena & Webster, Mort, 2016. "Technology adoption under time-differentiated market-based instruments for pollution control," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 23-34.
    6. Matthew E. Kahn, 2010. "New Evidence on Trends in the Cost of Urban Agglomeration," NBER Chapters, in: Agglomeration Economics, pages 339-354, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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. Ian W.H. Parry, 2005. "Fiscal Interactions and the Costs of Controlling Pollution from Electricity," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(4), pages 849-869, Winter.
    2. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Bharvirkar, Ranjit & Paul, Anthony, 2001. "Cost-Effective Reduction of NOx Emissions from Electricity Generation," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-55-rev, Resources for the Future.
    3. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen, 2003. "The Paparazzi Take a Look at a Living Legend: The SO2 Cap-and-Trade Program for Power Plants in the United States," RFF Working Paper Series dp-03-15, Resources for the Future.
    4. Parry, Ian W. H., 2004. "Are emissions permits regressive?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 364-387, March.
    5. Burtraw, Dallas & Bharvirkar, Ranjit & McGuinness, Meghan, 2001. "Uncertainty and the Cost-Effectiveness of Regional NOx Emissions Reductions from Electricity Generation," Discussion Papers 10846, Resources for the Future.
    6. Burtraw, Dallas & Szambelan, Sarah Jo, 2009. "U.S. Emissions Trading Markets for SO2 and NOx," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-40, Resources for the Future.
    7. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Krupnick, Alan & Evans, David & Toth, Russell, 2005. "Economics of Pollution Trading for SO2 and NOx," RFF Working Paper Series dp-05-05, Resources for the Future.
    8. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen L. & Heintzelman, Martin, 2000. "Electricity Restructuring: Consequences and Opportunities for the Environment," Discussion Papers 10854, Resources for the Future.
    9. Zhang, Hui & Cao, Libin & Zhang, Bing, 2017. "Emissions trading and technology adoption: An adaptive agent-based analysis of thermal power plants in China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 23-32.
    10. Meredith Fowlie, 2010. "Emissions Trading, Electricity Restructuring, and Investment in Pollution Abatement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 837-869, June.
    11. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert & Cavanagh, Sheila, 2001. "National Environmental Policy During the Clinton Years," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-38, Resources for the Future.
    12. Fowlie, Meredith, 2005. "Emissions Trading, Electricity Industry Restructuring and Investment in Pollution Abatement," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19265, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Bharvirkar, Ranjit & Paul, Anthony, 2001. "The Effect of Allowance Allocation on the Cost of Carbon Emission Trading," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-30-, Resources for the Future.
    14. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 27, pages 523-554, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Llop Llop, Maria, 2016. "A second-best analysis of alternative instruments for the preservation of natural resources?," Working Papers 2072/261533, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    16. Bento, Antonio M. & Franco, Sofia F. & Kaffine, Daniel, 2011. "Is there a double-dividend from anti-sprawl policies?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 135-152, March.
    17. Bento, Antonio M. & Jacobsen, Mark, 2007. "Ricardian rents, environmental policy and the `double-dividend' hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 17-31, January.
    18. Robert N. Stavins, 2008. "Addressing climate change with a comprehensive US cap-and-trade system," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 24(2), pages 298-321, Summer.
    19. Maria Llop, 2020. "A Second-Best Analysis of Alternative Instruments for the Preservation of Natural Resources," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, February.
    20. Palmer, Karen L. & Burtraw, Dallas, 2005. "The Environmental Impacts of Electricity Restructuring: Looking Back and Looking Forward," Discussion Papers 10656, Resources for the Future.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    emissions trading; cap and trade; air pollution; cost-benefit analysis; electricity; particulates; ozone; nitrogen oxides; acid rain;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-03-23. 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: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.html .

    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.