NUMBER 10

NUMBER 10

NUMBER 9

NUMBER 12

NUMBER 10

We analyze excess emissions from industrial facilities in Texas using data from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Emissions are characterized as excess if they are beyond a facility’s permitted levels and if they occur during startups, shutdowns, or malfunctions. We provide summary data on both the pollutants most often emitted as excess emissions and the industrial sectors and facilities responsible for those emissions. Excess emissions often represent a substantial share of a facility’s routine (or permitted) emissions. We find that while excess emissions events are frequent, the majority of excess emissions are emitted by the largest events. That is, the sum of emissions in the 96–100th percentile is often several orders of magnitude larger than the remaining excess emissions (i.e., the sum of emissions below the 95th percentile). Thus, the majority of events emit a small amount of pollution relative to the total amount emitted. In addition, a small group of high emitting facilities in the most polluting industrial sectors are responsible for the vast majority of excess emissions. Using an integrated assessment model, we estimate that the health damages in Texas from excess emissions are approximately $150 million annually

U.S. production of unconventional natural gas has increased rapidly over the last decade, and triggered public concerns about a variety of related risks. State policymakers vary in how they design regulatory policies to balance the anticipated risks and benefits, few attempts have been made, however, to evaluate the heterogeneity in state unconventional gas regulations. In this analysis, we develop a framework for comparing states based on how intensely they regulate unconventional gas development. We utilize two separate but complementary methodological approaches to investigate regulatory heterogeneity: an expert elicitation survey and principal components analysis. Our results indicate that, even though there is significant heterogeneity in state regulatory systems, there exist clusters of states that are consistently ranked at the top or the bottom along a continuum of regulatory stringency. States such as West Virginia, Colorado, Louisiana, New Mexico and Pennsylvania are found at the top of this scale, while at the lower end we find California, Tennessee, Mississippi and Montana. As states refine their regulatory systems, these rankings can be updated to reflect new policy and regulatory priorities.