We study the impact of local fuel standards targeting sulfur-related air pollution from maritime transport off the U.S. west coast on damages from greenhouse gases (GHGs) and other local air pollutants. By avoiding the regulated area, ocean-going vessels increase fuel use and emissions, shift fuel consumption away from population centers, and forgo emission-lowering speed reductions within the regulated area. These adjustments increase damages from GHGs but reduce damages from local pollution, leading to a shift in the distribution of the environmental burden of shipping. Behavioral adjustments, and correlated pollutant responses, depend on policy design and shipping patterns.
BOEM/NOAA. 2017. “2009-2016 Vessel Traffic (AIS) Data.”marinecadastre.gov/data. Accessed April 2018.
2.
BrunelC.JohnsonE. P.2019. “Two Birds, One Stone? Local Pollution Regulation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.”Energy Economics78: 1–12.
3.
BurtrawD.KrupnickA.PalmerK.PaulA.TomanM.BloydC.2003. “Ancillary Benefits of Reduced Air Pollution in the Us from Moderate Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Policies in the Electricity Sector.”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management45 (3): 650–73.
4.
CARB. 2008. Evaluation of the Availability of Low Sulfur Marine Distillate Fuel for Ocean-Going Vessels that Visit California. Sacramento, CA: California Air Resources Board (CARB).
5.
CARB. 2011. Fuel Sulfur and Other Operational Requirements for Ocean-Going Vessels within California Waters and 24 Nautical Miles of the California Baseline - Final Regulation Order. Sacramento, CA: California Air Resources Board (CARB).
6.
CARB. 2018. Annual Enforcement Reports, 2009-2017. Sacramento, CA: California Air Resources Board (CARB).
7.
ChanH. R.ZhouY. C.2021. “Regulatory Spillover and Climate Co-benefits: Evidence from New Source Review Lawsuits.”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management110: 102545.
8.
CorbettJ. J.WinebrakeJ. J.GreenE. H.KasibhatlaP.EyringV.LauerA.2007. “Mortality from Ship Emissions: A Global Assessment.”Environmental Science & Technology41 (24): 8512–8.
9.
DavisL.2008. “The Effect of Driving Restrictions on Air Quality in Mexico City.”Journal of Political Economy116 (1): 38–81.
10.
FullertonD.KarneyD. H.2018. “Multiple Pollutants, Co-Benefits, and Suboptimal Environmental Policies.”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management87: 52–71.
11.
GehrsitzM.2017. “The Effect of Low Emission Zones on Air Pollution and Infant Health.”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management83: 121–44.
12.
GibsonM.CarnovaleM.2015. “The Effects of Road Pricing on Driver Behavior and Air Pollution.”Journal of Urban Economics89: 62–73.
HarbergerA. C.1974. Taxation and Welfare. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
HausmanC.RapsonD. S.2018. “Regression Discontinuity in Time: Considerations for Empirical Applications.”Annual Review of Resource Economics10 (1): 533–52.
17.
ImbensG. W.LemieuxT.2008. “Regression Discontinuity Designs: A Guide to Practice.”Journal of Econometrics142 (2): 615–35.
18.
IMO. 2015. “Third IMO GHG Study 2014.”Technical Report, International Maritime Organization (IMO), London.
19.
IMO. 2020. Sulphur Oxides (SOx) and Particulate Matter (PM) – Regulation 14. London: International Maritime Organization (IMO).
20.
IWG. 2016. “Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis under Executive Order No. 12866.”Technical Report, Interagency Working Group (IWG) on Social Cost of Carbon, United States Government, Washington, DC.
21.
KlotzR.BeraznevaJ.2022. “Local Standards, Behavioral Adjustments, and Welfare: Evaluating California’s Ocean-Going Vessel Fuel Rule.”Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists9 (3): 383–424.
22.
LeapeJ.2006. “The London Congestion Charge.”Journal of Economic Perspectives20 (4): 157–76.
23.
LiuH.FuM.JinX.ShangY.ShindellD.FaluvegiG.ShindellC.HeK.2016. “Health and Climate Impacts of Ocean-Going Vessels in East Asia.”Nature Climate Change6 (11): 1037–41.
24.
MorettiE.NeidellM.2011. “Pollution, Health, and Avoidance Behavior: Evidence from the Ports of Los Angeles.”Journal of Human Resources46 (1): 154–75.
Office of Coastal Management. 2020. “Nationwide Automatic Identification System 2009.”
27.
ParryI.SmallK.2005. “Does Britain or the United States Have the Right Gasoline Tax?”American Economic Review95 (4): 1276–89.
28.
PhillipsE. E.2015. “West Coast Ports’ Import Share Falls in Wake of Slowdown.”Wall Street Journal.
29.
RennertK.ErricksonF.PrestB. C.RennelsL.NewellR. G.PizerW.KingdonC., et al. 2022. “Comprehensive Evidence Implies a Higher Social Cost of CO2.”Nature610 (7933): 687–92.
30.
RickeK.DrouetL.CaldeiraK.TavoniM.2018. “Country-Level Social Cost of Carbon.”Nature Climate Change8 (10): 895–900.
31.
SchlenkerW.WalkerW. R.2016. “Airports, Air Pollution, and Contemporaneous Health.”The Review of Economic Studies83 (2): 768–809.
32.
ShengY.ShiX.SuB.2018. “Re-Analyzing the Economic Impact of a Global Bunker Emissions Charge.” Energy Economics74: 107–119.
33.
ShindellD.KuylenstiernaJ. C. I.VignatiE.van DingenenR.AmannM.KlimontZ.AnenbergS. C., et al. 2012. “Simultaneously Mitigating Near-Term Climate Change and Improving Human Health and Food Security.”Science335 (6065): 183–9.
34.
UNCTAD. 2021. Review of Maritime Transport 2021. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
WeitzmanM. L.2014. “Fat Tails and the Social Cost of Carbon.”American Economic Review104 (5): 544–6.
40.
ZhaiM.WolffH.2021. “Air Pollution and Urban Road Transport: Evidence from the World’s Largest Low-Emission Zone in London.”Environmental Economics and Policy Studies23 (4): 721–48.
41.
ZhuJ.WangJ.2021. “The Effects of Fuel Content Regulation at Ports on Regional Pollution and Shipping Industry.”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management106: 102424.
42.
ZwicklK.SturnS.BoyceJ. K.2021. “Effects of Carbon Mitigation on Co-pollutants at Industrial Facilities in Europe.”The Energy Journal42 (5): 123–48.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
