Unless such differences are taken into account, estimates of abatement costs will be inaccurate and governments may seek to control the wrong fuels.

Researchers and policymakers can use marginal abatement cost (MAC) to consider different solutions.

The so-called avoidable abatement cost (AAC) in this method is comparable to the eco-costs.

At the same time, the city and landlords pay millions of dollars each year in abatement costs and liability claims.

It also requires the disposal of the hazardous materials, which alone can amount to 30% of total abatement costs.

A derivation of the marginal abatement cost curve.

For a given overall reduction, the efficient solution equates the marginal net benefit (damage reduction minus abatement cost) across different polluters.

Policy makers can compare the marginal abatement costs of different methods to assess the cost and amount of possible abatement over time.

The marginal abatement costs of the various measures will differ by country, by sector, and over time.

The city spends millions of dollars a year to remove lead from city-owned buildings and to inspect others, and private landlords face similarly high abatement costs.