The US Environmental Protection Agency - Essay Example

Vehicles, Engines and Fuels under EPA Pollution caused by vehicles contributes to exhaust emissions, which are “major contributors to air pollution” (Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [OEERE] 1). Under the the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970, air quality must be preserved. Current policies are successful, but carbon dioxide emissions too need to be decreased. Pollution created by vehicles causes market failure. In most heavily populated areas of the US, personal automobiles are the largest contributors to exhaust emissions (OEERE 1). American cars produce 20 percent energy – related emissions (Borger). Vehicles create exhaust gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), hydrocarbons (HC), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and particulate matter (OEERE 1). These pollutants create air pollution, adversely affecting health of the general population (OEERE 1). Market failure is inevitable as these negative externalities cause cardiopulmonary diseases leading to premature deaths, decreased visibility and other dangerous side effects. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used command and control policies (Peltz & Fitzgerald 2). Lead was removed from fuel, oxygenates were added and sulfur content was reduced (OEERE 2). Catalytic converters were placed on US passenger cars, SUVs and light trucks to reduce CO, NOx, HC, and VOC emissions. VOC emission capturing and emissions testing of cars were introduced too (OEERE 2). Many decided to commute and so decreased emissions levels. However, improvements also led to reckless behavior. Pollution caused by vehicles in the USA has become a global problem. While Americans represent only five percent of world population, they use one third of world’s cars (Borger). American cars are 15 percent less fuel efficient than passenger cars driven elsewhere. Moreover, Americans on average drive longer distances than Europeans or Asians. Since 1988, carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing (Borger). CAA has not produced positive results with regard to carbon dioxide emissions. The resulting pollution has increased incidence of cardiopulmonary conditions such as asthma and heart disease (OEERE 2). In 1990, under the CAA Amendments (CAAA), vehicle standards were made stricter (EPAa). Under the amendments, ozone pollution, carbon monoxide and particulate matter emissions were addressed. Procedures such as inspection/maintenance programs and vapor recovery installations at gas stations were introduced (EPAb). A permit system will be developed by states to control emission levels of sulfur dioxide through cap and trade program (EPAb; Peltz & Fitzgerald 2). Again, the US Department of Energy is funding projects in an attempt to improve fuel efficiency (OEERE 2). Financial costs of compliance will be borne mostly by the vehicle users. The costs are expected to increase in the 2000 – 2020 period, as population is expected to increase (Office of Air and Radiation 3 – 8). On the road vehicles and fuel users and producers will suffer the cost of $28.3 billion in 2020 (Office of Air and Radiation 3 – 8). In total, costs will amount to $65.5 billion in 2020 (Office of Air and Radiation 3 – 8). However, an unmeasured cost is the cost borne by the entire world, since pollution affects everyone. European countries, though they create less pollution, experience the same disease caused by pollution as Americans. Despite the social costs, EPA has estimated that benefits will outweigh the costs. Emissions of all of the gases, but carbon dioxide, are estimated to decrease by 2020 (Office of Air and Radiation 2 – 11). Office of Air and Radiation estimated that benefits will grow as emissions will decrease and so by 2020 they will reach approximately $2.0 trillion, which is much higher than the estimated costs (3 - 8). Benefits are largely measured through reductions in premature deaths caused by the particulate matter. By 2020, 230,000 deaths will be prevented in the US (Office of Air and Radiation 5 - 24). A new policy must address the reckless behavior of consumers. According to Peltz and Fitzgerald, any effective pollution control program will be able to align “economic incentives with the desired pollution abatement outcomes” (3). Sulfur dioxide emissions were not reduced until under CAAA, cap and trade system was introduced, which by 1999 reduced emissions to 4.3 million tons from 9.4 million in 1980 (Peltz & Fitzgerald 3). Emission producers were given an incentive through lower costs of alternative energy sources (Peltz & Fitzgerald 3). Markets could be used to decrease carbon dioxide emissions as well. Similarly, carbon dioxide emissions could be addressed through a cap and trade program so the emitters pay the costs of pollution. Moreover, long distance driving and fuel inefficient cars need to be addressed. Since commuting decreases emissions, more money should be invested in public transportation in cities and commuter rails so that fewer cars are used. However, this is a long term policy. By 2020, the infrastructure could be significantly improved. Meanwhile, electric cars could be subsidized by the government. Buyers could get a refund on the price paid, or companies producing cars could be given subsidies to produce these cars as a lower cost. Electric cars could be useful in the short run, as they would enable individuals in the suburbs to move until the public transportation systems are developed there as well. Emissions would decrease already in the short run, since fewer cars with high levels of emissions would be used. While health levels would improve, the government budget would suffer. Consumer health would improve in terms of a lower incidence of cardiopulmonary diseases, but car owners would need to pay for emissions or the cost of an electric car. Moreover, tax payers would suffer the cost of infrastructure investments through higher taxes or lower investment in other policy areas. New groups would benefit: the construction workers and construction related staff would find additional employment. Electric car producers would see a rise in demand, which could help the current economy. In short, market incentives must be taken advantage of to induce consumers to decrease the use of personal cars, or buy energy efficient cars. Besides health benefits, the economy would be given a stimulus, as new jobs would be created. Works cited Borger, Julian. “Half of Global Car Exhaust Produced by US Cars.” The Guardian, 29 Jun 2006. Web. 7 May 2012. EPAa. “Regulatory Topics.” US EPA, 4 May 2012. Web. 6 May 2012. EPAb. Highlights of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. EPA Journal, Jan/Feb (1991): 1. Web. 7 May 2012. Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. “Just the Basics: Vehicle Emissions.” US Department of Energy, Aug 2003. Web. 5 May 2012. Office of Air and Radiation. “The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act from 1990 to 2020.” US EPA, Mar 2011. Web. 7 May 2012. Peltz, Eduard A. and Fitzgerald, Terry J. “From Market Failure to Market – Based Solutions: Policy Lessons from Clean Air Legislation.” Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, 1 Aug 2011. Web. 7 May 2012. The Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq. 1970. US EPA, 24 Feb 2012. Web. 7 May 2012. Read More