A Costly Benefit: Economic Analysis Does Not Support EPA's New Arsenic Rule

7 Pages Posted: 31 Dec 2001  

Robert W. Hahn

University of Oxford, Smith School; Georgetown University

Jason K. Burnett

AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies

Abstract

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently finalized a rule that would reduce the maximum allowable level of arsenic in drinking water by 80 percent, from 50 micrograms per liter to 10 micrograms, by 2006. As soon as the rule was announced during the waning hours of the Clinton presidency, it became the topic of considerable debate as some experts argued that it is appropriate and necessary while others charged that its costs would far outweigh its benefits. The authors side with the latter group and argue that the costs may exceed the benefits by as much as $100 million annually.

Suggested Citation

Hahn, Robert W. and Burnett, Jason K., A Costly Benefit: Economic Analysis Does Not Support EPA's New Arsenic Rule. Regulation, Vol. 24, No. 3, Fall 2001. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=291806 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.291806

Robert W. Hahn (Contact Author)

University of Oxford, Smith School ( email )

Oxford
United Kingdom

Georgetown University

Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy
Washington, DC 20057
United States

Jason K. Burnett

AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies ( email )

1150 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036
United States
202-862-4876 (Phone)
202-862-7169 (Fax)

Paper statistics

Downloads
123
Rank
187,904
Abstract Views
1,195