A retrospective assessment of the costs of EPA’s 1998 Locomotive Emission Standards
-
Elizabeth Kopits
Abstract
While the need to update EPA benefit-cost analysis to reflect the most recent science is broadly acknowledged, little work has been done examining how well ex ante BCAs estimate the actual benefits and costs of regulations. This paper adds to the existing literature on ex post cost analyses by examining EPA’s analysis of the 1998 Locomotive Emission Standards. Due to data limitations and minimal ability to construct a reasonable counterfactual for each component of the cost analysis, the assessment relies mainly on industry expert opinion, augmented with ex post information from publicly available data sources when possible. The paper finds that the total cost of bringing line-haul locomotives into compliance with the 1998 Locomotive Emission Standards rule remains uncertain. Even though the initial per-unit locomotive compliance costs were higher than predicted by EPA, total costs also depend on the number of locomotives affected by the regulation. Over 2000–2009, the number of newly built line-haul locomotives was higher but the number of remanufactured line-haul locomotives was lower than EPA’s estimate.
Acknowledgment
The author appreciates the comments received from U.S. EPA’s Program Offices on an earlier version of this paper, as well as the helpful comments of two anonymous reviewers.
References
American Association of Railroads (AAR). (2001). Monthly railroad fuel price indexes.Search in Google Scholar
American Association of Railroads (AAR). (2002). Railroad facts, 2002 Ed.Search in Google Scholar
American Association of Railroads (AAR). (2003). Monthly railroad fuel price indexes.Search in Google Scholar
American Association of Railroads (AAR). (2006). Monthly railroad fuel price indexes.Search in Google Scholar
American Association of Railroads (AAR). (2009). Monthly railroad fuel price indexes.Search in Google Scholar
American Association of Railroads (AAR). (2011). Railroad facts, 2011 Ed.Search in Google Scholar
Chen, G., Flynn, P. L., Gallagher, S. M., & Dillen, E. R. (2003). Development of the low-emission GE 7-FDL high-power medium-speed locomotive diesel engine. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power,125, 505–512.10.1115/1.1563241Search in Google Scholar
Dillen, E. R., & Gallagher, S.M. (2002). Development of the Tier 1 emission reduction control strategy for GE-7FDL high-power medium-speed locomotive diesel engine. Proceedings of the 2002 Fall Technical Conference of the ASME Internal Combustion Engine Division, ICEF2002-504.10.1115/ICEF2002-504Search in Google Scholar
Dolak, J., & Bandyopadhyay, D. (2011). A computational investigation of piston bowl geometry for a large bore two-cycle diesel engine. Proceedings of the ASME Internal Combustion Engine Division’s 2011 Fall Technical Conference, ICEF2011-60155.10.1115/ICEF2011-60155Search in Google Scholar
Eastern Regional Technical Advisory Committee (ERTAC). (2012). Rail emissions inventory. Available at: http://www.gaepd.org/air/airpermit/downloads/planningsupport/regdev/locomotives/class2_3_doc2012.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Energy Information Administration (EIA). (1997). Annual energy outlook. Available at: ftp://ftp.eia.doe.gov/forecasting/038397.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Energy Information Administration (EIA). (2011). AEO2010 Retrospective Review. Available at: http://205.254.135.7/forecasts/aeo/retrospective/.Search in Google Scholar
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). (2009). Comparative evaluation of rail and truck fuel efficiency on competitive corridors. Available at: http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/Comparative_Evaluation_Rail_Truck_Fuel_Efficiency.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Flynn, P., Hupperich, P., Napierkowski, S., & Reichert, E. (2003). General electric GEVO engine For Tier 2 locomotive application. Proceedings of the 2003 Fall Technical Conference of the ASME Internal Combustion Engine Division, ICEF2003-708.10.1115/ICEF2003-0708Search in Google Scholar
Fritz, S., J. Hedrick, & B. Smith. (2005). Exhaust emissions from a 1,500 kW EMD 16-645-E locomotive diesel engine using several ultra-low sulfur diesel fuels. ASME Paper No. ICEF2005-1228.10.1115/ICEF2005-1228Search in Google Scholar
Kopits, Elizabeth, McGartland, Al, Morgan, Cynthia, Pasurka, Carl, Shadbegian, Ron, Simon, Nathalie, Simpson, David, & Ann Wolverton. (2014). Retrospective cost analyses of EPA regulations: a case study approach. Journal of Benefit Cost Analysis, 5(2), 173–193.10.1515/jbca-2014-0024Search in Google Scholar
US EPA. (1998). Locomotive emission standards regulatory support document. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/locomotv/frm/locorsd.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
US EPA. (2005). Locomotive compression-ignition engines certification data. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/certdata.htm#locomotive.Search in Google Scholar
US EPA. (2013). Science advisory board review of EPA’s retrospective cost study of the costs of EPA regulations: an interim report of five case studies (march 2012). EPA-SAB-13-002. Available at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/0/3a2ca322f56386fa852577bd0068c654!OpenDocument&TableRow=2.3#2.Search in Google Scholar
US EPA. (2014). Retrospective study of the costs of EPA regulations: a report of four case studies. Report number EPA 240-F-14-001. August 2014. Available at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/webpages/RetroCost.html.Search in Google Scholar
Uzkan & Lenz. (1999). On the concept of separate aftercooling for locomotive diesel engines. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 121, 205–210.Search in Google Scholar
Article note
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. EPA.
©2014 by De Gruyter
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Retrospective cost analyses of EPA regulations: a case study approach
- Ex ante and ex post cost estimates of the Cluster Rule and MACT II Rule
- Retrospective evaluation of costs associated with methyl bromide critical use exemptions for open field strawberries in California
- National primary drinking water regulation for arsenic: A retrospective assessment of costs
- A retrospective assessment of the costs of EPA’s 1998 Locomotive Emission Standards
- Do regulators overestimate the costs of regulation?
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Retrospective cost analyses of EPA regulations: a case study approach
- Ex ante and ex post cost estimates of the Cluster Rule and MACT II Rule
- Retrospective evaluation of costs associated with methyl bromide critical use exemptions for open field strawberries in California
- National primary drinking water regulation for arsenic: A retrospective assessment of costs
- A retrospective assessment of the costs of EPA’s 1998 Locomotive Emission Standards
- Do regulators overestimate the costs of regulation?
