TY - JOUR
T1 - An analysis of costs and health co-benefits for a U.S. Power Plant Carbon Standard
AU - Buonocore, Jonathan J.
AU - Lambert, Kathleen F.
AU - Burtraw, Dallas
AU - Sekar, Samantha
AU - Driscoll, Charles T.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Buonocore et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2016/6/1
Y1 - 2016/6/1
N2 - Reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants can have important "co-benefits" for public health by reducing emissions of air pollutants. Here, we examine the costs and health co-benefits, in monetary terms, for a policy that resembles the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan. We then examine the spatial distribution of the co-benefits and costs, and the implications of a range of cost assumptions in the implementation year of 2020. Nationwide, the total health co-benefits were $29 billion 2010 USD (95% CI: $2.3 to $68 billion), and net co-benefits under our central cost case were $12 billion (95% CI: -$15 billion to $51 billion). Net co-benefits for this case in the implementation year were positive in 10 of the 14 regions studied. The results for our central case suggest that all but one region should experience positive net benefits within 5 years after implementation.
AB - Reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants can have important "co-benefits" for public health by reducing emissions of air pollutants. Here, we examine the costs and health co-benefits, in monetary terms, for a policy that resembles the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan. We then examine the spatial distribution of the co-benefits and costs, and the implications of a range of cost assumptions in the implementation year of 2020. Nationwide, the total health co-benefits were $29 billion 2010 USD (95% CI: $2.3 to $68 billion), and net co-benefits under our central cost case were $12 billion (95% CI: -$15 billion to $51 billion). Net co-benefits for this case in the implementation year were positive in 10 of the 14 regions studied. The results for our central case suggest that all but one region should experience positive net benefits within 5 years after implementation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84975292112&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84975292112&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0156308
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0156308
M3 - Article
C2 - 27270222
AN - SCOPUS:84975292112
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 11
JO - PloS one
JF - PloS one
IS - 6
M1 - e0156308
ER -