Generally, some kind of economic incentive solution works much better than outright bans. It allows the market itself to decide what instances of pollution provide enough value to justify their harm and which ones don't. The problem is, however, that while such solutions work out great for global (or at least highly distributed) externalities, as you can simply set a rate of some given number of cents per ton of CO2 released and be done with it, they don't work quite so well for problems like these because the problem is semi-localized. One gram of lead released in a suburb is not the same as one gram of lead released in the middle of the city, and one gram of lead in paint is not the same as one gram of lead in gasoline. Sure, you can tax it too, but the tax would be so ridiculously high that the effect would be the same as an outright ban.