Pollution Control from Stationary Sources

  • Subhes C. Bhattacharyya


This chapter presents alternative mitigation options for pollution from stationary sources. It focuses on both direct and indirect control mechanisms and indicates the benefits and shortcomings of each option. The chapter elaborates on the cap-and-trade programme used in the US for mitigation of acid rains and also introduces the problems related to indoor air pollution.


Emission Trading Indoor Pollution Trading Programme Fuel Switching Ozone Season 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bruce N, Perez-Padilla R, Albalak R (2002) The health effects of indoor air pollution exposure in developing countries. World Health Organisation, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  2. Burtraw D, Palmer K (2003) The paparazzi take a look at a living legend: the SO2 cap-and-trade program for power plants in the United States. Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 15 (see
  3. Burtraw D, Szembelan SJ (2009) U.S. emissions trading markets for SOx and NOx. RFF-DP-09-40, Resources for the Future, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  4. Chestnut LG, Mills DM (2005) A fresh look at the benefits and the cost of the US acid rain program. J Environ Manage 77(3):252–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Environmental Defense (2000) From obstacle to opportunity: how acid rain emissions trading is delivering cleaner air. Environmental Defense, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. EPA (2005) Evaluating ozone control programs in the Eastern United States. Focus on NOx Budget Trading Program, Washington (see
  7. EPA (2010) Acid rain and related programs: 2009 emission, compliance and market analyses. Environment Protection Agency, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. Ezzati M, Kammen DM (2002) Household energy, indoor air pollution and public health in developing countries. RFF issue brief 02-26. Resources for the Future, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  9. Lovei M (1998) Phasing out lead from gasoline: worldwide experiences and policy implications. World Bank, Washington (see
  10. OTC (2003a) NOx budget program: 1999–2002 progress report. Ozone Transportation Commission, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  11. OTC (2003b) 2002 OTC NOx budget program compliance report. OTC, Washington (see
  12. Warwick H, Doig A (2004) Smoke—the killer in the kitchen. ITDG Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. World Bank (1992) World development report 1992, development and the environment. World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar

Further Reading

  1. EPA (2003) Tools of the trade: a guide to designing and operating a cap and trade programme for pollution control. US Energy Protection Agency, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  2. Eskeland GS, Devarajan S (1996) Taxing bads by taxing goods: pollution control with presumptive charges. World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  3. Krupnick A, Morgenstern R, Fisher C, Rolfe K, Logarta J, Rufo B (2003) Air pollution control policy options for Metro Manila, RFF discussion paper 03-30. Resources for the Future, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  4. EC (2001) Directive 2001/80/EC on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plantsGoogle Scholar
  5. Vehmas J, Kaivo-oja J, Luukkanen J, Malaska P (1999) Environmental taxes on fuels and electricity—some experience from the Nordic countries. Energy Policy 27(6):343–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. World Bank (1999) Pollution prevention and abatement handbook: toward cleaner production. The World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Energy, Petroleum and Mineral Law and PolicyUniversity of DundeeDundeeUK

Personalised recommendations