Chip Taylor

Costs, benefits, and environmental health

Fiscally conservative types often come under ridicule for suggesting that public policies regarding environmental protection or public health issues should be subjected to cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Opponents of CBA accuse proponents of only caring about money, or wanting to poison people, or allow them to remain sick. They seem to think that when there is some sort of environmental or health problem that cost should be no object. They willfully ignore the possibility that money might better be used to address some other problem or that there might be a more cost effective way to solve the problem at hand.

With that in mind, read Washington D.C. mayor Anthony Williams' response to the plan by the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority (WASA) to accelerate, beyond federal requirements, the replacing of lead pipes that are introducing lead into residents' drinking water.

Some city leaders, including Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D), had urged the agency to hold off on a complete lead pipe replacement program until the utility was able to assess the effects of new chemicals added last month to the drinking water. The change in water treatment, made by the Army Corps of Engineers, which operates the Washington Aqueduct, is intended to coat the pipes with a film and prevent the lead from leaching.

Tony Bullock, spokesman for the mayor, warned yesterday that WASA's decision could cause unnecessary disruption to neighborhoods. Streets will be closed for weeks, and sidewalks and curbs will be excavated. Homeowners with lead service pipes will have to decide whether to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to replace the portion of the pipes on their property.

"It's a laudable goal to want to rid the world of lead pipes," Bullock said. "At the same time, you have to have some evaluation and cost-benefit analysis of this. There is concern that WASA is moving a bit too quickly before having fully evaluated all of the consequences."

I'm glad the mayor of D.C. is a CBA supporter. But I can't help wondering if he would take the same position if a private company, rather than government agencies, were responsible for the lead pipes adulterating the water supply.