Social Costs of Aircraft Noise and Engine Emissions: Case Study of Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport

2000 ◽  
Vol 1703 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Morrel ◽  
Cherie H.-Y. Lu
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Social Cost ◽  
Aircraft Noise ◽  
Social Costs ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Hedonic Price ◽  
Engine Emissions ◽  
Direct Evaluation ◽  
The Social

With the increasing trend of charging for externalities and the aim of encouraging the sustainable development of the air transport industry, there is a need to evaluate the real social costs of the undesirable side effects of aircraft noise and engine emissions. The mathematical models, based on extensive literature reviews of existing externality measurements, are developed to derive the social costs of noise and engine emissions from aircraft movements in monetary terms by using Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport as a case study. Furthermore, the results of a survey on the current noise and engine emissions charges are briefly described and compared. The hedonic price method is applied to calculate the annual social cost of aircraft noise during the landing and takeoff stages of the flight. In contrast, the direct evaluation method is applied to estimate the social cost of each engine exhaust pollutant during different flight modes. The empirical results have shown that the average social cost of noise per aircraft landing at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport is similar to that of emissions, assuming a 30-min cruise time to landing or after takeoff. However, the uncertainty in the estimation of social costs for emissions is higher than that for noise, mainly because of the unknown effects of the exhaust pollutants on the upper atmosphere and on the climate.

Environmental and social follow-up costs of traffic in cities: A case study of the city of Augsburg differentiated by means of transport

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Oebel ◽  
Dr. Tobias Gaugler
Keyword(s):  
Public Transport ◽  
Air Pollutants ◽  
Social Costs ◽  
External Costs ◽  
Environmental Costs ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The City

<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> External costs, mobility, environmental costs, social costs, monetarization</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study provides a methodology to evaluate the environmental and social costs, which arise from traffic in the German city of Augsburg. Social costs are driven by air pollutants such as nitric oxides or particulate matter, causing health damages. Environmental follow-up costs are driven by the emission of greenhouse gases. Furthermore, approaches for a successful transformation towards a car-free city are shown.</p> <p><strong>Method: </strong>Based on traffic data from the Augsburg Civil Engineering Office, as well as traffic shares from the German Federal Motor Transport Authority, the average emission factors of vehicles on Augsburg´s streets and, subsequently, the total traffic emissions on municipal roads in the city are quantified. The environmental as well as the social consequences are monetarized using the cost rates by Matthey and Bünger (2019) and van Essen et al. (2019). Social costs are additionally assessed using to the DALY approach. Therefore the DALYs lost due to air pollutants are determined and costs per DALY are calculated using the willingness to pay-approach by Cropper and Khanna (2014) and Spengler (2004) additionally to a method by Daroudi et al. (2019) assessing health care expenditures.</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> Applying this framework to the case study of Augsburg, results show, that environmental costs of 140.6 Million € arise from traffic in the city per year. These costs are entirely attributable to car traffic (77.7%), truck traffic (19.8%) and motorcycle traffic (1.9%), as public transport in Augsburg is climate neutral. Further, traffic on municipal roads in Augsburg causes a loss of 212.3 DALYs per year, which equals to annual social costs of 27.2 Million €. Cars account for 63.2% of those, trucks for 33.8%, motorcycles for 2.3% and buses for 0.2%, respectively. With a proportion of passenger kilometers of 90.4% from cars, 6.1% from motorcycles and 3.6% from buses, it is evident that cars contribute disproportionately to the environmental and social costs of Augsburg's traffic.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> The social and economic follow-up costs of transport in the city of Augsburg are currently not borne by the polluter. Their great amount encourages measures, such as reinforcing the use of bicycles or public transport, eventually facilitating a change towards sustainable traffic in Augsburg.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>References</strong></p> <p>Cropper, Maureen; Khanna, Shefali (2014): How Should the World Bank Estimate Air Pollution Damages? In Resources for the Future Discussion Paper, pp. 14–30.</p> <p>Daroudi, Rajabali; Faramarzi, Ahmad; Akbari Sari, Ali; Nahvijou, Azin (2019): Cost Per Daly Averted in Low, Middle and High Income Countries: Evidence from Global Burden of Disease Study to Estimate the Cost Effectiveness Thresholds. In SSRN Journal.</p> <p>Matthey, Astrid; Bünger, Björn (2019): Methodenkonvention 3.0 zur Ermittlung von Umweltkosten – Kostensätze. Edited by Umweltbundesamt. Available online at https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/1410/publikationen/2019-02-11_methodenkonvention-3-0_kostensaetze_korr.pdf, checked on 10/29/2020.</p> <p>Spengler, Hannes (2004): Kompensatorische Lohndifferenziale und der Wert eines statistischen Lebens in Deutschland. In Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung-Journal for Labour Market Research 37 (3), pp. 269–305.</p> <p>van Essen, Huib; van Wijngaarden, Lisanne, Schroten, Arno; Sutter, Daniel; Bieler, Cuno; Maffii, Silvia; Brambilla, Marco et al. (2019): Handbook on the external costs of transport. Edited by CE Delft. Available online at https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/studies/internalisation-handbook-isbn-978-92-79-96917-1.pdf, checked on 10/29/2020.</p>

The social cost of methane: theory and applications

2017 ◽  
Vol 200 ◽  
pp. 429-451 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. T. Shindell ◽  
J. S. Fuglestvedt ◽  
W. J. Collins
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Dioxide ◽  
Carbon Dioxide Emissions ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Social Cost ◽  
Methane Emissions ◽  
Social Costs ◽  
Dairy Consumption ◽  
Societal Benefits ◽  
The Social ◽  
Wide Range

Methane emissions contribute to global warming, damage public health and reduce the yield of agricultural and forest ecosystems. Quantifying these damages to the planetary commons by calculating the social cost of methane (SCM) facilitates more comprehensive cost-benefit analyses of methane emissions control measures and is the first step to potentially incorporating them into the marketplace. Use of a broad measure of social welfare is also an attractive alternative or supplement to emission metrics focused on a temperature target in a given year as it incentivizes action to provide benefits over a broader range of impacts and timescales. Calculating the SCM using consistent temporal treatment of physical and economic processes and incorporating climate- and air quality-related impacts, we find large SCM values, e.g. ∼$2400 per ton and ∼$3600 per ton with 5% and 3% discount rates respectively. These values are ∼100 and 50 times greater than corresponding social costs for carbon dioxide. Our results suggest that ∼110 of 140 Mt of identified methane abatement via scaling up existing technology and policy options provide societal benefits that outweigh implementation costs. Within the energy sector, renewables compare far better against use of natural gas in electricity generation when incorporating these social costs for methane. In the agricultural sector, changes in livestock management practices, promoting healthy diets including reduced beef and dairy consumption, and reductions in food waste have been promoted as ways to mitigate emissions, and these are shown here to indeed have the potential to provide large societal benefits (∼$50–150 billion per year). Examining recent trends in methane and carbon dioxide, we find that increases in methane emissions may have offset much of the societal benefits from a slowdown in the growth rate of carbon dioxide emissions. The results indicate that efforts to reduce methane emissions via policies spanning a wide range of technical, regulatory and behavioural options provide benefits at little or negative net cost. Recognition of the full SCM, which has typically been undervalued, may help catalyze actions to reduce emissions and thereby provide a broad set of societal benefits.

scholarly journals A virtual hydrological framework for evaluation of stochastic rainfall models

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bree Bennett ◽  
Mark Thyer ◽  
Michael Leonard ◽  
Martin Lambert ◽  
Bryson Bates
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Method ◽  
South Australia ◽  
Evaluation Methods ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
Streamflow Prediction ◽  
Direct Evaluation ◽  
Rainfall Model ◽  
Rainfall Statistics ◽  
The Impact

Abstract. Stochastic rainfall modelling is a commonly used technique for evaluating the impact of flooding, drought or climate change in a catchment. While considerable attention is given to the development of stochastic rainfall models, significantly less attention is given to performance evaluation methods. Typical evaluation methods employ a variety of rainfall statistics. However, they give limited understanding about which rainfall characteristics are most important for reliable streamflow prediction whenever the simulated rainfall are poor. To address this issue a new evaluation method for rainfall models is introduced, with three key features: (i) streamflow-based – to give a direct evaluation of modelled streamflow performance, (ii) virtual – to avoid the issue of confounding errors in hydrological models or data, and (iii) targeted – to isolate the source of errors according to specific sites and months. The virtual hydrologic evaluation framework is applied to a case study of 22 sites in South Australia. The framework demonstrated that apparently good modelled rainfall can produce poor streamflow predictions, whilst poor modelled rainfall may lead to good streamflow predictions, as catchment processes can dampen or amplify rainfall errors when converted to streamflow. The framework identified the importance of rainfall in the wetting-up months of the catchment cycle (May and June in this case study) for providing reliable predictions of streamflow over the entire year despite their low monthly flow volume. This insight would not have been found using existing methods and highlights the importance of the virtual hydrological evaluation framework for stochastic rainfall model evaluation.

scholarly journals The Social “Cost” of Working in Groups and Impact on Values and Creativity

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Runco ◽  
Ning Hao ◽  
Selcuk Acar ◽  
Jing Yang ◽  
Mengying Tang
Keyword(s):  
Small Group ◽  
Divergent Thinking ◽  
Social Cost ◽  
Social Preferences ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Social Costs ◽  
Value Judgments ◽  
Good Decision ◽  
The Social ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractCreative things are always original, but they must be more than just original. They must also have some utility, effectiveness, or value. The present research tested the psychoeconomic definition of “value” and examined how value ratings fluctuated when individuals worked in groups or alone. This psychoeconomic definition of value is very different from that found in previous studies. It was based on ratings obtained after the students participating had been told that their grades depended on their teamwork. Previous studies have used hypothetical ratings of value, but here the ratings were meaningful: there was a contingency placed on making a good decision, and that decision focused on creative teamwork. This investigation also tested the idea that originality and value are both required for creativity. Psychoeconomic theory not only offers an objective and behavioural index of value. It also offers predictions about the “social costs” of working in groups. To test these ideas individuals received two tests of divergent thinking, either while alone (no social cost), working in a small group (low cost), or working in a larger group (high cost). Social preferences were controlled, as was extraversion. Results indicate that fluency did not diminish when the social costs were present. Moreover, originality increased when participants worked in groups. Findings also demonstrated that value judgments can be reliably assessed and that the interaction of value and originality accounted for a significant amount of the variability in creativity ratings.

The Dark Side of Luxury: Social Costs of Luxury Consumption

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 767-779 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Cannon ◽  
Derek D. Rucker
Keyword(s):  
Impression Management ◽  
Social Cost ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Social Costs ◽  
Dark Side ◽  
Social Benefits ◽  
Luxury Consumption ◽  
Luxury Goods ◽  
Lay Beliefs ◽  
The Social

Extant research demonstrates that luxury goods are beneficial signals that bestow upon individuals social benefits that range from positive evaluations to compliance. In contrast to this perspective, the current work explores the idea that luxury goods can carry significant negative social costs for actors. Across four experiments, the social cost of luxury is examined. Although individuals who display luxury goods are ascribed higher status, they can pay a hefty tax when it comes to warmth. The social costs of luxury consumption appear to be driven by impression management concerns rather than envy. Consequently, whether the consumption of luxury goods yields positive or negative social consequences for an actor critically depends both on whether status or warmth is relevant for a decision and observers’ own lay beliefs about luxury consumption. Overall, this work reveals the more complex psychology of individuals’ interpretation and response to actors’ use of luxury goods.

Comparing the social costs of biofuels and fossil fuels: A case study of Vietnam

2013 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 227-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loan T. Le ◽  
Ekko C. van Ierland ◽  
Xueqin Zhu ◽  
Justus Wesseler ◽  
Giang Ngo
Keyword(s):  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Social Costs ◽  
The Social
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document