ABSTRACT
Even greater cost savings (half the cost of command and control) could be had from an ozone exposure reduction program-one that targeted NOx emissions reductions geographically, concentrating cleanup in the Midwest and New York. But in that case the Bay would fare worse than under command and control. Thus not every tack that EPA might take to reduce ozone would benefit the Chesapeake as much as any other, nor do cost savings and NOx emissions reductions always go hand in hand. The crucial calculation for the Bay’s health hinges on where the NOx is reduced.
