Natural Resource Damage Assessment: Methods and Cases

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Price of groundwater P0 P1 Price of groundwater D P0 P1 A B A B Figure 3.1: Market Price Method C J K Q0 Supply C K Q0 D D0 is the demand for groundwater before contamination. D1 is the demand for groundwater after contamination. P0 is the price of groundwater before contamination. P1 is the price of groundwater after contamination. A, B, C, and K identify key points on the graphs; see text. 59 Supply Panel B: Upward-sloping supply D1 D1 D0 Quantity of groundwater Panel A: Fixed supply D0 Quantity of groundwater
Output price P0 C D S0 is the supply of a product before groundwater contamination. S1 is the supply of a product after groundwater contamination. Q0 is output of a product before groundwater contamination. Q1 is output of a produce after groundwater contamination. A, B, C, and D identify key points on the graph; see text. Figure 3.2: Reductions in Profits from Groundwater Contamination Reductions in profit can also be measured by the price of the output times the change in the quantity of the good being produced. This can be treated as an estimate of the value of water if it is assumed that the price of the output is fixed and the price of the remaining inputs is unchanged. This method ignores the potential for substitution of other inputs for water in the production process. It can also lead to incorrect estimates if groundwater values or output prices are distorted due to government programs. C. Appraisal Method A B Q1 The appraisal method can be used in accordance with the applicable sections of the “Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisition” incorporated into Title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations. When contamination occurs, the value of the loss due to this contamination is determined by the difference between the value of the groundwater with contamination and without contamination. The value of groundwater in the absence of contamination could be its market value if groundwater rights are marketable. For example, suppose that the water at a site is potable prior to the contamination and is only suitable for 60 Q0 S1 S0 Output quantity
Page 1 and 2:
WMRC Reports Waste Management and R
Page 3 and 4:
RR-108 Natural Resource Damage Asse
Page 5 and 6:
Acknowledgments Funding was provide
Page 7 and 8:
Chapter 1: Tables and Figures Table
Page 9 and 10:
staff of agencies that are just beg
Page 11 and 12:
All: 64 Nevada Division of Environm
Page 13 and 14: Table 1.5 Number of Cases Settled b
Page 15 and 16: Table 1.9 Number of Potentially Res
Page 17 and 18: Table 1.14 Cost to Trustee of Perfo
Page 19 and 20: Mean Settlement (million $) 90 80 7
Page 21 and 22: V. Conclusions Trustees have had re
Page 23 and 24: Appendix: Materials in Information-
Page 25 and 26: NRD: Natural resource damages. Guid
Page 27 and 28: Survey of State Natural Resource Da
Page 29 and 30: 19) Has this case been settled? (Ch
Page 31 and 32: I. Introduction Chapter 2 Simplifie
Page 33 and 34: Number of Spills 1,000 800 600 400
Page 35 and 36: damages not quantifiable at reasona
Page 37 and 38: (b) Columbia River Estuary: Bird, f
Page 39 and 40: Example of the Washington method in
Page 41 and 42: % of All Cases 35 30 25 20 15 10 5
Page 43 and 44: preventing excessive expenditures o
Page 45 and 46: Example of the Florida formula in u
Page 47 and 48: damages to natural resources at con
Page 49 and 50: discharge on receptors studied in t
Page 51 and 52: Information for this calculation is
Page 53 and 54: ased funding for the program was pr
Page 55 and 56: a spill occurs in a high income are
Page 57 and 58: References Cozine, M. H. 1999. “N
Page 59 and 60: Chapter 3: Tables and Figures Table
Page 61 and 62: This chapter will examine the exten
Page 63: Comprehensive Environmental Respons
Page 67 and 68: Travel-cost analysis can be used fo
Page 69 and 70: area B and computing willingness to
Page 71 and 72: Table 3.1: Summary of Studies Estim
Page 73 and 74: Schultz and Lindsay (1990) estimate
Page 75 and 76: Table 3.3: Using Benefits Transfer
Page 77 and 78: Number of Cases 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Page 79 and 80: Table 3.4 Groundwater Case Studies
Page 81 and 82: and overall protection of the resou
Page 83 and 84: References Abdalla, C. W. 1991. “
Page 85 and 86: Nielson, E. G. and L.K. Lee. Octobe
Page 87 and 88: United States, adjoining shorelines
Page 89 and 90: Once there is a “release” of a
Page 91 and 92: 1997). Second, there can be no reco
Page 93 and 94: settlement of NRD claim prior to an
Page 95 and 96: egulations divide the assessment pr
Page 97 and 98: Damages: The trustees calculated th
Page 99 and 100: The State hired consultants (ARCADI
Page 101 and 102: C. Lake Barre/Texaco Site: The site
Page 103 and 104: would be inefficient and unnecessar
Page 105 and 106: Damages: The U.S. Coast Guard requi
Page 107 and 108: Creek and the cultural importance o
show all

Natural Resource Damage Assessment: Methods and Cases

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

Delete template?

Save as template?