Benefit-cost analysis of the Stage 1 D/DBP Rule

In December 1998, the U.S. EPA promulgated the Stage 1 Disinfectant /Disinfection By-Products (1 D/DBP) Rule to minimize DBP. The rule would achieve this primarily through low-cost modifications, including enhanced coagulation and moving the point of disinfection, rather than advanced technologies....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the American Water Resources Association 1999-01, Vol.91 (4), p.137-147
Hauptverfasser: Odom, R, Regli, S, Messner, M, Cromwell, J, Javdan, M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 147
container_issue 4
container_start_page 137
container_title Journal of the American Water Resources Association
container_volume 91
creator Odom, R
Regli, S
Messner, M
Cromwell, J
Javdan, M
description In December 1998, the U.S. EPA promulgated the Stage 1 Disinfectant /Disinfection By-Products (1 D/DBP) Rule to minimize DBP. The rule would achieve this primarily through low-cost modifications, including enhanced coagulation and moving the point of disinfection, rather than advanced technologies. Although the D/DBP Rule would cost about 700 million U.S. dollars to implement, its benefits would be worth more. Human exposure to DBP was likely to fall 24 per cent, with a projected fall in bladder cancer probably worth 4 billion U.S. dollars. The rule's benefits and costs were analysed by 5 approaches: an overlap analysis of costs and benefits; a break-even analysis of how much bladder cancer risk would have to be reduced for the rule to pay for itself; the cost of compliance for each household; a calculation of annual net benefits from an evaluation of rule cost, exposure reduction and attributable bladder cancer risk; and an analysis of the maximal financial consequences if the supporting assumptions were wrong. Health risk uncertainties made the derivation of definitive answers difficult.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_13605816</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>13605816</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_136058163</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYeA0NLA01jUxN4ngYOAqLs4yMDA0NbQw5mTQd0rNS03LLNFNzi8uUUjMS8ypLM4sVshPUyjJSFUILklMT1UwVHDRd3EKUAgqzUnlYWBNS8wpTuWF0twMam6uIc4eugVF-YWlqcUl8bmZxcmpOTmJean5pcXxhsZmBqYWhmbGRCsEAJQuM9M</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>13605816</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Benefit-cost analysis of the Stage 1 D/DBP Rule</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Odom, R ; Regli, S ; Messner, M ; Cromwell, J ; Javdan, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Odom, R ; Regli, S ; Messner, M ; Cromwell, J ; Javdan, M</creatorcontrib><description>In December 1998, the U.S. EPA promulgated the Stage 1 Disinfectant /Disinfection By-Products (1 D/DBP) Rule to minimize DBP. The rule would achieve this primarily through low-cost modifications, including enhanced coagulation and moving the point of disinfection, rather than advanced technologies. Although the D/DBP Rule would cost about 700 million U.S. dollars to implement, its benefits would be worth more. Human exposure to DBP was likely to fall 24 per cent, with a projected fall in bladder cancer probably worth 4 billion U.S. dollars. The rule's benefits and costs were analysed by 5 approaches: an overlap analysis of costs and benefits; a break-even analysis of how much bladder cancer risk would have to be reduced for the rule to pay for itself; the cost of compliance for each household; a calculation of annual net benefits from an evaluation of rule cost, exposure reduction and attributable bladder cancer risk; and an analysis of the maximal financial consequences if the supporting assumptions were wrong. Health risk uncertainties made the derivation of definitive answers difficult.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1093-474X</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 1999-01, Vol.91 (4), p.137-147</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Odom, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Regli, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Messner, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cromwell, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Javdan, M</creatorcontrib><title>Benefit-cost analysis of the Stage 1 D/DBP Rule</title><title>Journal of the American Water Resources Association</title><description>In December 1998, the U.S. EPA promulgated the Stage 1 Disinfectant /Disinfection By-Products (1 D/DBP) Rule to minimize DBP. The rule would achieve this primarily through low-cost modifications, including enhanced coagulation and moving the point of disinfection, rather than advanced technologies. Although the D/DBP Rule would cost about 700 million U.S. dollars to implement, its benefits would be worth more. Human exposure to DBP was likely to fall 24 per cent, with a projected fall in bladder cancer probably worth 4 billion U.S. dollars. The rule's benefits and costs were analysed by 5 approaches: an overlap analysis of costs and benefits; a break-even analysis of how much bladder cancer risk would have to be reduced for the rule to pay for itself; the cost of compliance for each household; a calculation of annual net benefits from an evaluation of rule cost, exposure reduction and attributable bladder cancer risk; and an analysis of the maximal financial consequences if the supporting assumptions were wrong. Health risk uncertainties made the derivation of definitive answers difficult.</description><issn>1093-474X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpjYeA0NLA01jUxN4ngYOAqLs4yMDA0NbQw5mTQd0rNS03LLNFNzi8uUUjMS8ypLM4sVshPUyjJSFUILklMT1UwVHDRd3EKUAgqzUnlYWBNS8wpTuWF0twMam6uIc4eugVF-YWlqcUl8bmZxcmpOTmJean5pcXxhsZmBqYWhmbGRCsEAJQuM9M</recordid><startdate>19990101</startdate><enddate>19990101</enddate><creator>Odom, R</creator><creator>Regli, S</creator><creator>Messner, M</creator><creator>Cromwell, J</creator><creator>Javdan, M</creator><scope>7QH</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19990101</creationdate><title>Benefit-cost analysis of the Stage 1 D/DBP Rule</title><author>Odom, R ; Regli, S ; Messner, M ; Cromwell, J ; Javdan, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_136058163</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Odom, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Regli, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Messner, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cromwell, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Javdan, M</creatorcontrib><collection>Aqualine</collection><jtitle>Journal of the American Water Resources Association</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Odom, R</au><au>Regli, S</au><au>Messner, M</au><au>Cromwell, J</au><au>Javdan, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Benefit-cost analysis of the Stage 1 D/DBP Rule</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the American Water Resources Association</jtitle><date>1999-01-01</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>91</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>137</spage><epage>147</epage><pages>137-147</pages><issn>1093-474X</issn><abstract>In December 1998, the U.S. EPA promulgated the Stage 1 Disinfectant /Disinfection By-Products (1 D/DBP) Rule to minimize DBP. The rule would achieve this primarily through low-cost modifications, including enhanced coagulation and moving the point of disinfection, rather than advanced technologies. Although the D/DBP Rule would cost about 700 million U.S. dollars to implement, its benefits would be worth more. Human exposure to DBP was likely to fall 24 per cent, with a projected fall in bladder cancer probably worth 4 billion U.S. dollars. The rule's benefits and costs were analysed by 5 approaches: an overlap analysis of costs and benefits; a break-even analysis of how much bladder cancer risk would have to be reduced for the rule to pay for itself; the cost of compliance for each household; a calculation of annual net benefits from an evaluation of rule cost, exposure reduction and attributable bladder cancer risk; and an analysis of the maximal financial consequences if the supporting assumptions were wrong. Health risk uncertainties made the derivation of definitive answers difficult.</abstract></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1093-474X
ispartof Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 1999-01, Vol.91 (4), p.137-147
issn 1093-474X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_13605816
source Access via Wiley Online Library
title Benefit-cost analysis of the Stage 1 D/DBP Rule
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T20%3A19%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Benefit-cost%20analysis%20of%20the%20Stage%201%20D/DBP%20Rule&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20American%20Water%20Resources%20Association&rft.au=Odom,%20R&rft.date=1999-01-01&rft.volume=91&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=137&rft.epage=147&rft.pages=137-147&rft.issn=1093-474X&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E13605816%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=13605816&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true