Current Policy to Manage Air Pollution in Australia

Environmental externalities are the environmental effects of production which affects the consumer utility and costs. This report is about the issue of air pollution in Australia which is the major environmental externality there.  The task will describe and evaluate the policy which the country is currently using to reduce air pollution. It will also identify the problems, costs and benefits of this externality. Lastly the task will describe the possible solutions and recommendations which need to be employed in order to reduce air pollution.

The National Clean Air Agreement is the policy which the Government of Australia is currently using to ensure that the challenges of air quality in the present and future are reduced. This policy was established in the year 2015 by the Australia’s environment ministers. This policy enables the country to identify some actions which will be employed so as to acquire benefits from a national collaboration which addresses issues of air quality, health and environmental outcomes (Hyland, 2012, p. 154). The agreement’s work plan contains these actions which are agreed by the ministers in federal, state and also territory environment. The plan also contains roles, responsibilities and the timeframes which implement the actions. After every two years, the plan is reviewed so as to ensure its relevant.

The priority setting process is important because it focuses on the future efforts which are used to improve the quality of air in Australia. The 2015-2017 plan contains action contains agreed upon by the ministers (Jacoby, 2014, p. 10). The mid-term review report contains a progress in the initial work plan after 12 months.

 According to the 2018-2020 work plan, the ministers agreed on some actions to be taken to reduce air pollution in Australia so as to ensure there is air quality. These actions include;

1.The ministers agreed that the national ambient air quality standards needed to be reviewed which include; sulfur dioxide, ozone and nitrogen dioxide standard; the National pollutant inventory and the fuel quality standard.

2.The ministers agreed to finish up the new emission and efficiency standards adoption which include the new wood heaters and a commitment sharing of management practices.

According to the work plan, the achievements from the 2015-2017 plan include; standards for particle pollution which is the ambient air quality and the standard for marine engines and new outdoor power equipment which is the product emissions (Townshend, 2013, p. 25). With this policy, the government of Australia has been able to maintain a good performance and come up with measures to reduce air pollution hence improving the overall air quality in Australia.

Assessment of the Policy

Environmental externalities are the environmental effects of production which affects the consumer utility and costs. Negative externalities lead to low cost of production than the social costs. Example is a factory producing widgets but polluting the environment. The air pollution due to vehicle emissions is an example of negative externality

In this report, we will focus on the major environmental externality of air pollution in Australia. One of the major ways in which people pollute air in Australia is through vehicle emissions which cause health problems.  Some people find themselves idling in the road especially when one goes for a quick errand. In this case, the engine is left running hence wasting money, fuel and dumps the pollutants to the air hence polluting the environment (Ostrom, 2012, p. 353). Many people don’t realize this because of ignorance.

The risk of increased air pollution in Australia is due to population growth and ageing, urbanization and increased transport and energy demands. These affects the air quality which might affect the present and future generations (Barnett, 2012, p. 28). That’s why the government of Australia has implemented a policy to improve the air quality in Australia.

This pollution affects the people by contacting respiratory diseases, cardiovascular diseases, cancer, dementia, pregnancy complications and also adverse birth outcomes. Public health campaigns should be set so that people’s beliefs will be changed on what to do to reduce these air pollutions. The Australian government need more complex policies which will be able to reduce the issue of air pollution (Joss, 2017, p. 453). Some policies like fuel efficiency standards and vehicle emission standards have been able to solve this issue.

Australia has been left behind in coming up with policies to reduce air pollution example the rules on sulfur in fuels which damage the vehicle emissions. Australia has sulfur standards for petrol which allow 150 parts per million as compared to Japan, US and European Union and three times than in China (Young, 2013, p. 89).

Number of deaths due to air pollutions has increased in Australia as compared to other economies. This is because out of 34 countries in the OECPD, 20 countries saw the decline in deaths meaning Australia is among the 14 countries whose death rates keep on increasing. The report from the OECPD states that Australia has failed to reduce the rapidly rise in air pollution where the economic cost has run into billions.

Approximately, there are 740 deaths per year in Australia according to the estimate by the OECD (Dobbie, 2015, p. 55).  These deaths are due to the inhalation of vehicle emissions which affects the lungs hence passing through the bloodstream. Every year there are about 1280 deaths on the roads and the 740 deaths due to air pollution. This is a cost that involves a transport system which is more reliant on fossil fuel. These death costs due to air pollution for the OECPD countries hit around $US1.7 trillion in the year 2010 and an economic cost of about $5.8 billion in 2010 from $2.9 billion. This was due to the usage of diesel vehicles in many countries which end up polluting the air.

Challenges and Costs of Air Pollution

Through the Euro 6 standard which is stricter and mandated for light and heavy vehicles, there will be a net benefit of A$675 million by 2040. This will be less as compared to the present annual cost of vehicle pollution of A$4billion in Australia (Nemet, 2010, p. 14). The problem of the standard is that it’s a usual business in the US and Europe. The statement doesn’t consider banning diesel vehicles in the cities and this is a policy which most experts term as best practice.

The fuel efficiency and vehicle emission policies in Australia have been reviewed this year and they will be able to improve the air quality (Dominici, 2010, p. 187). This is the best chance which will be able to improve fuel efficiency, increase the demand for high quality fuel and also improve the air in the cities.

Only vehicles with automatic technology should be purchased so as to reduce the vehicle emissions (Klaassen, 2012, p. 5). This automated technology enables the vehicle to switch off when it’s still and also enables the driver to start the vehicle when they press the accelerator.

The Australian refineries should be upgraded so as to supply low sulfur fuel and this is a more sustainable approach to air pollution. The cost of health burden due to vehicle emissions is too high for the society.

Investing in transport systems that operates on fossil fuel should be avoided and rather Public transport operating with clean fuels should be supported (Martin, 2012, p. 119). This will be able to reduce air pollution in the cities because mostly electricity will be used especially by trains. Public awareness should be raised to educate people on the quality of air and also ensure that the government considered both long-term and short-term policies. People should not idle in cars because it is an offence and might lead to fines of not less than $ 5000 or even a jail time in some areas. This will improve the air quality in Australia. This is important because we need air to breath as we cannot survive without a clean air.

Conclusion

The report has described a policy which is currently being used by the government of Australia to reduce air pollution in the country. Air pollution is a major environmental externality in Australia and has resulted to many problems hence affecting the people around who inhale the emissions from the vehicles leading to health infections. Through air pollution, Australia has incurred a lot of costs as deaths tend to increase. the nation has come up with different measures and standards to reduce the issue of pollution in the cities.

References

Barnett,A.G.,, 2012. Air pollution trends in four Australian cities 1996-2011. Air Quality and Climate Change,, 46(4), p. 28.

Dobbie,B., and Green,D.,, 2015. Australians are not equally protected from industrial air pollution.. Environmental Research Letters,, 10(5), p. 55-78

Dominici,F.,Peng,R.D.,Barr,C.D.,& Bell,M.L, 2010. Protecting human health from air pollution:shifting from a single-pollutant to a multi-pollutant approach.. Epidemiology(Cambridge,Mass.), 21(2), p. 187.

Hyland, A.,Barnoya, J., & Corral,J.E, 2012. Smoke -free air policies:past,present and future.. Tobacco control,, 21(2), pp. 154-161.

Jacoby,H.D., & Chen,Y.H., 2014. Expectations for a new climate agreement.. s.l.:MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change,p.10.

Joss,M.K.,Eeftens,M.,Gintowt,E.,Kappeler,R.,&Kunzli,N., 2017. Time to harmonize national ambient air quality standards,. International Journal of public health,, 62(4), pp. 453-462.

Klaassen,G, and Forsund, F.R. eds.,, 2012. Economic instruments for air pollution control( vol.9). s.l.:Springer Science & Businee Media, p.5

Martin,N.J., & Rice,J.L, 2012. Developing renewable energy supply in Queensland, Australia:A study of the barriers, targets, policies and actions.. Renewable Energy,, Issue 44, pp. 119-127.

Nemet,G.F.,Holloway,T.,& Meier,P., 2010. Implications of incorporating air-quality co-benefits into climate change policymaking.. Environmental Research Letters, 5(1), p. 014007.

Ostrom,E.,, 2012. Nested externalities and polycenric institutions:must we wait for global solutions to climate change before taking actions at other scales?.. Economic theory,, 49(1), pp. 353-369.

Townshend,T., & Matthews,A.C,, 2013. National climate change legislation:the key to more ambitious international agreements.. London: CDKN/Globe International,p.25.

Young,N.,&Coutinho,A., 2013. Government anti-reflexivity, and the construction of public ignorance about climate change:Australia and Canada compared.. Global Environmental Politics,, 39(2), pp. 89-108.