The Houston Chronicle
www.chron.com

Nov. 16, 2000

By BILL DAWSON
Copyright 2000 Houston Chronicle Environment Writer

An economic study commissioned by a local business group says the state's proposed smog plan for Houston would result in significantly slower job growth.

The Business Coalition for Clean Air, which sponsored the study, already has been arguing for replacing several parts of the plan with less expensive measures.

But the new study -- presented last week to state officials and discussed Thursday at a University of Houston conference -- adds a last-minute element to the public debate over the best way to slash smog levels locally.

Today, the executive director of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission's staff is scheduled to publish his revised recommendations for the Houston plan. That advice is expected to have a strong influence when the three TNRCC commissioners adopt a final version Dec. 6.

"Houstonians need to be prepared to learn that part of the cost of cleaning up the environment is a slightly slower economy," said Barton Smith, one of the BCCA study's principal authors and director of the Institute for Regional Forecasting at UH.

But TNRCC Commissioner Ralph Marquez said the smog plan to be adopted next month will aim to reduce the costs estimated in the business group's study by changing some measures the study analyzed.

The revised plan's costs "will still be big money, but less than predicted," Marquez said.

The BCCA, which has more than 120 member companies, is a project of the Greater Houston Partnership, the area's leading business-advocacy group.

It has argued for a number of changes in the smog proposal published by the TNRCC this summer. They include substituting a 75 percent emission-reduction requirement for industrial plants in place of the state proposal's 90 percent cutback. Under this scenario, industries would make up the difference by paying for lower-cost pollution cuts by others.

BCCA members want Houston to comply with the ozone standard, but they want it done in the most cost-effective way, said Charles Duncan, a former energy secretary who serves as BCCA's chairman.

"The overriding issue is, we want to get there to the extent possible (while) maintaining the economy that has made Houston what it is," he said.

The BCCA's economic study forecasts that 112,800 fewer jobs would be created locally by 2010 under the pending TNRCC proposal, compared with 39,100 fewer jobs under the business group's suggested measures.

Besides lowering the 90 percent emission requirement for industrial facilities, the BCCA advocates eliminating the TNRCC's proposed bans on morning use of construction and gasoline-powered lawn equipment, as well as its tighter rules for fuels and engines than federal regulations will phase in.

An economist for an environmental group said the BCCA's study may have have overestimated the TNRCC plan's net costs and understated the benefits of cleaner air.

Pete Emerson, senior economist in the Austin office of Environmental Defense, a national advocacy group, said the benefits are likely to be far greater than the BCCA study's projections.

He noted that the study calculates only $35 million in benefits, while a study sponsored by the city of Houston estimated last year that the local health benefits of meeting the ozone standard would be $73 million a year.

Reducing emissions of nitrogen oxide, which helps form ozone and is the smog plan's main target, is also expected to reduce local levels of tiny airborne particles.

The city's study projected a health benefit of $2.9 billion to $3.1 billion from lowering both ozone and particle levels.

Bill White, a former deputy energy secretary and Texas Democratic party chairman who heads a Houston energy company, said the BCCA study is useful for comparing the different costs of the TNRCC and business group proposals.

He said he doubts "whether the study accounts for the full benefits of public health and for the benefits to Houston in attracting new skilled workers" because of its cleaner air.