The paper describes a comparison of the cost-effectiveness of four multicomponent, multimedia pollution abatement options: coal cleaning, limestone, limestone plus adipic acid, and coal cleaning plus limestone plus adipic acid. The comparison makes cost-effectiveness evaluations of the options applied to SO2 and particulate discharges from coal combustion. This approach can be used to make similar comparisons for a variety of other pollutants that are components of complex process streams. It is not the intent to select one process over another, but rather to illustrate how the health benefits gained by each option may be gauged relative to incurred costs. This can determine, for example, whether money spent on removing 10% more of pollutant X from a process stream could be better spent on a process that removes 1% more of pollutant Y from the same source. To evaluate abatement systems, the effect of each system on pollutants of concern in the process stream must be compared. Comparisons can be made if emissions standards for chemical species (those for SO2 and particulates, for example) are available. However, since standards have been established for only a few substances, surrogate goals -- derived from a methodology that translates toxicological data into acceptable levels for pollutants in discharge streams -- are used. Multimedia Environmental Goals (MEG) methodology is an integral part of the EPA/IERL-RTP program and is used to guide the development of abatement technology more effectively.