14.12.2012 Views

International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

arrive at a ‘best estimate’ <strong>of</strong> the damages associated with the pollutants being<br />

examined. 1169<br />

Given that knowledge <strong>of</strong> the health effects <strong>of</strong> various pollutants is still developing,<br />

and that some methodological issues are unresolved in the approaches to valuation,<br />

it is to be expected that estimates will vary across studies. However, the values<br />

derived for use in the HM C&E study are almost all lower than those derived for the<br />

UK in the CAFÉ study. Indeed, only for PM does the high end <strong>of</strong> the range used in the<br />

body <strong>of</strong> work we are discussing overlap with any part <strong>of</strong> the range deemed<br />

appropriate from the UK-based modelling under CAFÉ.<br />

The Enviros and EFTEC study adopts a sophisticated modelling approach to<br />

understand the exposure arising from different sources <strong>of</strong> emissions but adopts<br />

conservative – possibly outdated - estimates <strong>of</strong> the impacts <strong>of</strong> the pollutants. As<br />

pointed out above, the analysis is doubly conservative since it concentrates on only a<br />

small range <strong>of</strong> pollutants.<br />

The estimates are considered conservative partly because a view from COMEAP - put<br />

forward in 1998 – suggested that several impacts should not be valued because<br />

‘accurate’ dose response functions could not be agreed upon. The values in this<br />

report, therefore, omit a range <strong>of</strong> health effects typically captured in EU studies, such<br />

as:<br />

951<br />

1. Congestive heart failure<br />

2. Restricted activity days<br />

3. Bronchodilator use<br />

4. Cough<br />

5. Lower respiratory symptoms –n children<br />

6. Cerebrovascular hospital admission<br />

7. Chronic bronchitis<br />

8. Chronic cough<br />

9. Asthma attack<br />

10. Minor restricted activity day<br />

For comparison, the unit damage costs derived from three studies are given in Table<br />

61-2.<br />

1169 See European Commission (1998) DGXII (JOULE Programme) Externalities <strong>of</strong> Energy, ExternE<br />

Project, Report Number 10, National Implementation. Edited by CIEMAT. Report available from<br />

European Commission DG Research; M. Holland and P. Watkiss (2002) Benefits Table Database:<br />

Estimates <strong>of</strong> the Marginal External Costs <strong>of</strong> Air Pollution in Europe, Database Prepared for European<br />

Commission DG Environment; AEAT Environment (2005) Damages per tonne Emission <strong>of</strong> PM2.5, NH3,<br />

SO2, NOx and VOCs from Each EU25 Member State (excluding Cyprus) and Surrounding Seas, Report<br />

to DG Environment <strong>of</strong> the European Commission, March 2005.<br />

<strong>International</strong> <strong>Review</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Waste</strong> <strong>Policy</strong>: Annexes

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!