#climate laws

[rjzimmerman]

Yesterday felt like an earthquake shook the foundations of our climate and environmental laws, followed by a hurricane that scattered the bits all over the place and a wildfire that burned those bits that weren't scattered. I didn't watch any part of yesterday's debauchery, either on TV or streaming or the alerts that pop up on my iPhone or iPad, or read anything (neither national, local or environmental or climate specialized media). I figured most of the crap he did yesterday will be the subject of strategic lawsuits, and much will be tossed out as contrary to legislation or regulation or unconstitutional. In other words, I'll pay attention to the reconstruction, not the destruction. But.......it was still a horse shit day.

This compilation from the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law (of the Columbia Law School/Columbia Climate School) is outstanding. Click/tap on the caption of this post and you'll be able to figure out what happened and sort things out as you want. Just click/tap on the caption and go for it. But if you don't want to do that, here's the compilation, abbreviated. Italicized/red fonts are my addition, either explanatory or editorial.

PUTTING AMERICA FIRST IN INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGREEMENTS

Withdraw from Paris Climate Agreement

Withdraw from any other agreements made under UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

Revoke any financial commitments under UNFCCC

Revoke U.S. International Climate Finance Plan

DECLARING A NATIONAL ENERGY EMERGENCY

Declares national energy emergency, primarily based on high energy prices

Use any lawful emergency authorities “to facilitate the identification, leasing, siting, production, transportation, refining, and generation of domestic energy resources.”

Use Defense Production Act and federal eminent domain authorities

Issue emergency fuel waivers to allow year-round sale of E15 gasoline (E15 is ethanol/gasoline mix)

“Expedite the completion of all authorized and appropriated infrastructure, energy, environmental and natural resources projects”

Use emergency authorities and nationwide permits to grant approvals under Clean Water Act Sec. 404, Rivers and Harbors Act Sec. 10, and Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act Sec. 103 for energy projects

Use emergency consultation processes under Endangered Species Act, and frequent convening of Endangered Species Act Committee, for energy projects

Use construction authority of Army Corps of Engineers

The term “energy” is defined to mean “crude oil, natural gas, lease condensates, natural gas liquids, refined petroleum products, uranium, coal, biofuels, geothermal heat, the kinetic movement of flowing water, and critical minerals” [not wind or solar] (excluding wind and solar is childish and just plain stupid)

UNLEASHING AMERICAN ENERGY

“eliminate the ‘electric vehicle (EV) mandate’ and promote true consumer choice … by terminating … state emissions waivers that function to limit sales of gasoline-powered automobiles; and by considering the elimination of unfair subsidies and other ill-conceived government-imposed market distortions that favor EVs” (the elon musk pacifier....i.e., Tesla)

“safeguard the American people’s freedom to choose from a variety of goods and appliances, including but not limited to lightbulbs, dishwashers, washing machines, gas stoves, water heaters, toilets, and shower heads”

Require all agency heads to review all existing regulations “that impose an undue burden on the identification, development, or use of domestic energy resources – with particular attention to oil, natural gas, coal, hydropower, biofuels, critical mineral, and nuclear energy resources”

Attorney General “shall consider whether pending litigation against illegal, dangerous, or harmful policies should be resolved through stays or other relief”

Revocation of many executive orders

Terminate the American Climate Corps

Council on Environmental Quality must propose rescinding its NEPA regulations (NEPA regulations are the core of our environmental laws)

CEQ to convene working group to expedite permitting approvals

“all agencies must prioritize efficiency and certainty over any other objectives, including those of activist groups that do not align with the policy goals”

“facilitate the permitting and construction of interstate energy transportation and other critical energy infrastructure, including … pipelines”

In NEPA and other permitting reviews, “agencies shall adhere to only the relevant legislated requirements for environmental considerations and any considerations beyond those requirements are eliminated”

Disband Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases; all of its guidance, recommendations, etc. are withdrawn

Consider eliminating the “social cost of carbon” calculation

EPA in collaboration with other agencies shall submit recommendations to OMB “on the legality and continuing applicability” of the greenhouse gas endangerment finding of 2009 (this is the core concept from the US Supreme Court case that provides the legal basis for greenhouse gas controls)

Immediately pause disbursement of funds appropriated through Inflation Reduction Act or Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act; review processes for issuing grants, loans, contracts, or any other financial disbursement of appropriated funds

Secretary of Energy to restart reviews of applications for approvals of LNG export projects

Maritime Administration to review approvals for proposed deepwater ports for LNG export

“identify all agency actions that impose undue burdens on the domestic mining and processing of non-fuel minerals and undertake steps to revise or rescind such actions”

UNLEASHING ALASKA’S EXTRAORDINARY RESOURCE POTENTIAL

Expedite permitting and leasing of energy and natural resource projects in Alaska

Prioritize development of Alaska’s LNG potential

End restrictions on development of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and certain other areas in Alaska

Numerous other actions to facilitate energy development in Alaska

TEMPORARY WITHDRAWAL OF ALL AREAS ON THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF FROM OFFSHORE WIND LEASING AND REVIEW OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S LEASING AND PERMITTING PRACTICES FOR WIND PROJECTS

Stop leasing of federal waters for offshore wind

Issue no new or renewed approvals, rights of way, loans for onshore or offshore wind projects

“consider the environmental impact of onshore and offshore wind projects upon wildlife, including, but limited to, birds and marine mammals”

PUTTING PEOPLE OVER FISH: STOPPING RADICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM TO PROVIDE WATER TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

Restart work “to route more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to other parts of the state for use by the people there who desperately need a reliable water supply”

“The recent deadly and historically destructive wildfires in Southern California underscore why the State of California needs a reliable water supply and sound vegetation management practices in order to provide water desperately needed there”

DELIVERING EMERGENCY PRICE RELIEF FOR AMERICAN FAMILIES AND DEFEATING THE COST-OF-LIVING CRISIS

Among many other actions, “eliminate counterproductive requirements that raise the costs of home appliances”

“Eliminate harmful, coercive ‘climate’ policies that increase the costs of food and fuel”

[climatecalling]

A groundbreaking California law will force large companies doing business in the state – including major global corporations – to disclose their planet-heating carbon emissions. The measure, signed into law by the governor, Gavin Newsom, on Saturday, will be the nation’s first of its kind, serving as a blueprint for national climate accountability. It comes as federal regulators have dragged their feet on crafting similar rules, which could be finalized this month. SB 253 will require California regulators to create rules by 2025 for public and private companies whose annual revenues exceed $1bn. That affects about 5,300 corporations, including Chevron, Wells Fargo, Amazon and Apple. By 2026, those companies will have to publicly disclose how much carbon is produced by their operations and electricity use. Critically, by 2027, they will also be required to report emissions generated by their supply chains and customers, known as “scope 3” emissions, which are highly controversial among business interests, including the fossil fuel industry. A companion bill passed by the state’s legislature, SB-261, would additionally require businesses with more than $500m in yearly revenue to disclose their climate-related financial risks beginning in 2026, or face annual penalties. Both bills will make new data public beyond California’s borders, which supporters say could be game-changing.

[hope-for-the-planet]

The Climate Change Superfund Act makes major fossil fuel companies financially liable for damage due to extreme weather events and other dangers related to climate change. The amount these companies are responsible for paying depends on their contributions to emissions since 1995.

Money collected from fossil fuel companies will be used to mitigate the health impacts of climate change and improve public infrastructure.

[reasonsforhope]

"Tuesday’s [April 9, 2024] definition-shifting court ruling means nearly 50 governments must now contend with a new era of climate litigation.

Governments be warned: You must protect your citizens from climate change — it’s their human right.

The prescient message was laced throughout a dense ruling Tuesday from Europe’s top human rights court. The court’s conclusion? Humans have a right to safety from climate catastrophes that is rooted in their right to life, privacy and family.

The definition-shifting decision from the European Court of Human Rights means nearly 50 governments representing almost 700 million people will now have to contend with a new era of litigation from climate-stricken communities alleging inaction. 

While the judgment itself doesn’t include any penalties — the case featured several women accusing Switzerland of failing to shield them from climate dangers — it does establish a potent precedent that people can use to sue governments in national courts.

The verdict will serve “as a blueprint for how to successfully sue your own government over climate failures,” said Ruth Delbaere, a legal specialist at Avaaz, a U.S.-based nonprofit that promotes climate activism...

Courting the courts on climate

The European Court of Human Rights was established in the decade following World War II but has grown in importance over the last generation. As the judicial arm of the Council of Europe, an international human rights organization, the court’s rulings are binding on the council’s 46 members, spanning all of Europe and numerous countries on its borders.

As a result, Tuesday’s [April 9, 2024] ruling will help elevate climate litigation from a country-by-country battle to one that stretches across continents.

Previously, climate activists had mostly found success in suing individual countries to force climate action. 

A 2019 Dutch Supreme Court verdict forced the Netherlands to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent, while in 2021 a French court ruled the government was responsible for environmental damage after it failed to meet greenhouse gas reduction goals. That same year, Germany’s Constitutional Court issued a sweeping judgment that the country’s 2019 climate law was partly “unconstitutional” because it put too much of the emissions-cutting burden on future generations.

Even in the U.S., young environmental activists won a local case last year against state agencies after arguing that the continued use of fossil fuels violated their right to a "clean and healthful environment."

But 2024 is shaping up to be a turning point for climate litigation, redefining who has a right to sue over climate issues, what arguments they can use, and whom they can target. 

To start, experts overwhelmingly expect that Tuesday’s ruling will reverberate across future lawsuits — both in Europe and globally. The judgment even includes specifics about what steps governments must take to comply with their new climate-related human rights obligations. The list includes things like a concrete deadline to reach climate neutrality, a pathway to getting there, and evidence the country is actually on that path...

Concretely, the verdict could also affect the outcomes of six other high-profile climate lawsuits pending before the human rights court, including a Greenpeace-backed suit questioning whether Norway's decision to grant new oil and gas licenses complies with its carbon-cutting strategy.

An emerging legal strategy

In the coming months, other international bodies are also expected to issue their own rulings on the same thorny legal issues, which could further solidify the evolving trend. 

The International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights all have similar cases working through the system.

"All these cases together will clarify the legal obligations of states to protect rights in the context of climate change — and will set the stage for decades to come," said Chowdhury, from the environmental law center."

-via Politico, April 9, 2024

[probablyasocialecologist]

Leading barristers have defied bar rules by signing a declaration saying they will not prosecute peaceful climate protesters or act for companies pursuing fossil fuel projects.

They are among more than 120 mostly English lawyers who have signed a declaration vowing to “withhold [their] services in respect of supporting new fossil fuel projects and action against climate protesters exercising their right of peaceful protest”.

Noting that climate breakdown represents “a serious risk to the rule of law”, the so-called “declaration of conscience” calls on legal professionals “to act urgently to do whatever they can to address the causes and consequences of the climate and ecological crises and to advance a just transition”.

[...]

One junior lawyer, who wished to remain anonymous, said: “Young lawyers are being placed in an impossible position. We’re being told by our firms and regulators it’s a professional obligation to act for fossil fuel projects, knowing that doing so will poison our own future and all of life on Earth. That’s wrong on every level. It’s indefensible. If the profession doesn’t look out for my generation, how does it expect to survive?”

[canichangemyblogname]

Just had to explain to my mother that most of the people who’ve lost their homes in the Palisades fire take in an average income very close to her father’s pension. “But the news is showing homes like Paris Hilton’s—”

The news is a business. It gets clicks and views through what is sensational. No one is tuning in to watch Grandpa Joe’s home that he built with his wife in ‘66 burn to the ground. No one is reading and watching because Andres and Valeria’s house where they’ve been raising their three kids burned down.

Most of the people affected *are* middle class. The fire is consuming entire apartment complexes, and as a member of the renter class I know we don’t rent for funsies. We rent because we cannot afford a home/mortgage.

Multi-million dollar homes burning to the ground is flashy, and focusing on that to the detriment of the stories of everyone else is preventing class empathy. And my “conspiracy” is that this is a feature, not a bug, of American news/media.

[lilybug-02]

Ho boy! -Do I love reading scientific articles about managed retreat, the process by which people are moving from their homes and communities as a way to escape the growing threat of rising sea level and natural disasters. And how the people being most effected are low income or indigenous peoples. And how the US government is oblivious to the social injustice of how they go about it all.

This doesn't make me want to cry my eyes out at all!

[originalleftist]

There are really just two issues that matter this election:

One is climate- Biden put us on a path to halve carbon emissions in 6 years and reach net zero by 2050. Harris will continue that. Trump will actually increase use of fossil fuels while gutting regulations.

Every person on Earth will be harmed and endangered by that, regardless of your identity, location, or views.

The other issue is the peaceful transfer of power. Whatever problems you may have with Harris, she'll leave peaceably in 4 or 8 years. Trump will not. This is not fear mongering or hyperbole. He has said that if he wins we'll never need to vote again. He met his last electoral defeat by inciting and enabling a violent insurrection. Sure, he's an old man, but he's surrounded by young men who share the same contempt for democracy and the rule of law- like his Vice Presidential nominee, JD Vance, who will assume power if he dies in office.

We were lucky to get him out once, barely. His people are much more prepared for a coup now, he'll have broad legal immunity now thanks to SCOTUS, and he's openly vowed to become "a dictator on day one" and deploy troops on American streets.

Any issue with Harris is a temporary problem, and you can try again in 4 or 8 years. With Trump, you can't.

THE ONLY REASON TO ELECT TRUMP IS IF YOU ACTIVELY WANT THE WORLD TO BURN. And don't care how many actual people burn in the process. And if that is your position, then by your own choice you are an enemy of all humanity.

[purpleweredragon]

https://juststopoil.org/2025/01/16/heathrow-paint-spraying-trial-ends-with-a-hung-jury/

Two trial of 2 Just Stop Oil Supporters ended with a hung jury.

Phoebe Plummer and Jane Touil were accused of criminal damage over £5,000 for spraying Heathrow departure boards with orange paint.

The trial lasted nine days and ended when the jury failed to reach a majority decision. A retrial has been scheduled for next year.

Phoebe Plummer said: "The prosecution says I’m ‘committed to breaking the law’; my only commitment is to act in line with my conscience. They say ‘I do what I like without thinking about the law’. I don’t think following the law and doing the right thing are always the same thing."

[strawlessandbraless]

This is the same exact spot in the Arctic Ocean photographed 105 years ago vs what it looks like today. But sure, climate change is a hoax

[dandelionsresilience]

Good News - August 1-7

Like these weekly compilations? Tip me at $kaybarr1735 or check out my new(ly repurposed) Patreon!

1. Zoo hails birth of 'one of world's rarest animals'

“[Jasper] the Persian onager was born to mum Azita after a year-long pregnancy. […] Conservationists at the zoo said there are less than 600 surviving wild onagers[, … which] only survive in two small, protected areas in Iran, a Chester Zoo spokesman said. […] Mike Jordan, animal and plant director at Chester Zoo, […] said Jasper is "doing very well" and added that "mum Azita is doing a fantastic job of nurturing and bonding with her new charge". "He’s full of energy and enjoys playfully kicking up sand as he races around his habitat", Mr Jordan added.”

2. Charity creates 50 community orchards in city

“Community orchards are returning to Birmingham, with the aim of teaching people how to grow their own food and be part of the solution to climate change. […] Once established, the long-term aim is to distribute the produce to those most in need, but local people are also invited to pick the odd bit of fruit. […] By planting trees and plants and encouraging biodiversity back to these areas the charity is also doing its bit to help climate change. They even use locally sourced wood chip which helps to put carbon back into the soil. […T]he hope is that these edible landscapes can also be enjoyed by local people for years to come.”

3. Farmer-led badger vaccination could revolutionize mission to tackle bovine TB

“[… T]he results of a four-year pilot badger vaccination program co-managed between farmers, scientists, and conservationists […] show the percentage of badgers testing positive for bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in the study area dropped from 16% to 0%[….] While most bTB incidents in cattle are caused by transmission between herds, transmission from wild badgers plays a role in the persistence of the disease. […] Blood sampling showed that the proportion of badgers with bTB fell even though overall badger numbers remained high[….]”

4. Every Colorado Anti-Trans Ballot Initiative Fails To Collect Enough Signatures

“Anti-transgender politics are becoming increasingly unpopular in polls. […] A recent LA Times/NORC poll found that 77% of voters believe elected officials use transgender debates to divert attention from more pressing issues. The poll also showed significant opposition to forced outing policies. […] A Gallup poll published in June revealed that while Americans have mixed views on the morality of transitioning, the majority oppose bans on gender-affirming care for trans youth. […] “The fact that they could not get enough signatures, barely half, to be placed on the ballot shows they lack support from everyday voters.”

5. In a fight to save a rare bird, Indigenous communities in Guyana are winning

“The partnership [between Indigenous communities and Smithsonian researchers] sparked a decades-long community-led conservation movement that has protected the red siskin and helped locals reconnect with nature. [… T]he South Rupununi Conservation Society […] established one of the country’s first conservation zones to protect the species, covering 75,000 hectares (185,000 acres) of Indigenous land. […] To plant the seeds of conservation, they’ve implemented an after-school program in more than 16 communities, [introducing children] to ecological research and surveying, and also [teaching] about Indigenous culture and tradition, including fire management skills.”

6. North Adams hospital gets federal designation which pays for health care in rural areas

“[The hospital] received a federal designation on Wednesday that is key to its long-term financial stability. […] The designation pays for staffing regardless of the number of patients[… and] “works to resolve stark inequities in rural and underserved communities as it relates to our nation’s health system."”

7. Andrea Vidaurre: Leading the clean transportation revolution

“Thanks to Vidaurre’s relentless advocacy and strong community support, these regulations introduced the first national standards for train emissions and set a groundbreaking goal for all freight trucks to be zero-emission by 2036. This initiative promises cleaner air for Californians and paves the way for a zero-emission vehicle future across the country. Studies predict these measures will prevent thousands of respiratory illnesses and save countless lives in the coming decades.”

8. Boston announces a new climate resilience office

“Through its Climate Ready Boston initiative, the city has worked to […] design creative adaptation plans with community input[, …] includ[ing] everything from redesigning waterfront parks and planting more trees, to modernizing the city’s underground sewer system[….] The Office of Climate Resilience will be in charge of coordinating work across city departments and with community groups[….]”

9. Combining Green Thumbs and Sustainable Fashion in a Swap Event

“This unique plant and clothing swap event in NSW is championing both environmental and fashion sustainability through native plants and preloved clothing. […] To participate in the plant swap, attendees brought their environmental weeds in a bag to the Council stall and exchanged them for free native plants. […] The event sparked valuable community conversations about the benefits of plant and clothes swaps, the impact of textile waste[, …] support a circular economy and combine a love for nature with practical, eco-friendly practices.”

10. Growing Green Spaces to Protect the Endangered Regent Parrot

“On Schools Tree Day, celebrated on 26 July, students from a local NSW school planted trees and shrubs to create crucial forage habitat for the endangered Regent Parrot, enhancing local biodiversity. […] Approximately 50 [… plants of] native species were chosen for their ecological benefits, helping to attract native birds, bees and butterflies while providing essential habitat and food. […] They [also] raise awareness about the regent parrot, encourage conservation efforts and emphasise the importance of protecting local wildlife. Additionally, conserving [the regent parrot] supports the health of their ecosystem by helping with in [sic] seed dispersal and maintaining plant diversity.”

July 22-28 news here | (all credit for images and written material can be found at the source linked; I don’t claim credit for anything but curating.)

[hope-for-the-planet]

From the article:

The Supreme Court on Monday said it will not consider whether to quash lawsuits brought by Honolulu seeking billions of dollars from oil and gas companies for the damage caused by the effects of climate change, clearing the way for the cases to move forward. The legal battle pursued in Hawaii state court is similar to others filed against the nation's largest energy companies by state and local governments in their courts. The suits claim that the oil and gas industry engaged in a deceptive campaign and misled the public about the dangers of their fossil fuel products and the environmental impacts. A group of 15 energy companies asked the Supreme Court to review a decision from the Hawaii Supreme Court that allowed a lawsuit brought by the city and county of Honolulu, as well as its Board of Water Supply, to proceed. The suit was brought in Hawaii state court in March 2020, and Honolulu raised several claims under state law, including creating a public nuisance and failure to warn the public of the risks posed by their fossil fuel products.  The city accused the oil and gas industry of contributing to global climate change, leading to flooding, erosion and more frequent and intense extreme weather events. These changes, they said, have led to property damage and a drop in tax revenue as a result of less tourism. The energy companies unsuccessfully sought to have the case moved to federal court, arguing that the claims raised by Honolulu under state law were overridden by federal law and the Clean Air Act. A state trial court denied their efforts to dismiss the case.

[reasonsforhope]

An illegal toxic dump site in Croatia, the theft of water from a major aquifer in southern Spain, illegal trading of ozone-depleting refrigerants in France: This is just a sampling of the environmental crimes that European countries are struggling to stop. The lack of accountability for these acts stems in part from the European Union’s legal code, which experts say is riddled with vague definitions and gaps in enforcement. That’s about to change. 

Last week, EU lawmakers voted in a new directive that criminalizes cases of environmental damage “comparable to ecocide,” a term broadly defined as the severe, widespread, and long-term destruction of the natural world. Advocates called the move “revolutionary,” both because it sets strict penalties for violators, including up to a decade in jail, and because it marks the first time that an international body has created a legal pathway for the prosecution of ecocide.

“This decision marks the end of impunity for environmental criminals and could usher in a new age of environmental litigation in Europe,” wrote Marie Toussaint, a French lawyer and EU parliamentarian for the Greens/European Free Alliance group, on X...

The new directive uses the term “ecocide” in its preamble, but does not criminalize the act by laying out a legal definition (the most widely accepted definition of ecocide was developed by an international panel of experts in 2021). Instead, it works by providing a list of “qualified offenses,” or crimes that fall within its purview. These include pollution from ships, the introduction of invasive species, and ozone depletion...

The new law holds people liable for environmental destruction if they acted with knowledge of the damage their actions would cause. This aspect of the law is important, experts said, because it means that a permit is no longer enough for a company to avoid culpability.  

“If new information shows that behavior is causing irreversible damage to health and nature – you will have to stop,” a member of the European Parliament from the Netherlands, Antonius Manders, told Euronews. 

Advocates like Mehta hope that the EU’s move will have influence beyond Europe’s borders. The principal goal of the Stop Ecocide campaign is for the International Criminal Court to designate ecocide as the fifth international crime that it prosecutes, after crimes against humanity, war crimes, crimes of aggression, and genocide. At the moment, environmental destruction can only be prosecuted as a war crime at the ICC, and limitations in the law make this extremely difficult to do...

Kate Mackintosh, the executive director of the Netherlands-based UCLA Law Promise Institute Europe, told Grist that the ICC is unlikely to adopt an ecocide law if other countries do not do so first. 

“It’s not something you can just pull out of thin air,” she said, adding that any international legal doctrine has to have a precedent on the national level. “That’s the way states are going to accept it.”

The EU’s 27 member states will have two years to adapt the new legislation into their penal codes. Afterwards, their implementation must be reviewed and updated at least once every five years using a “risk-analysis based approach,” to account for advancements in experts’ understanding of what might constitute an environmental crime. Mehta said that despite its omission of some important offenses, the law sets an important example for other countries. Several days before the EU vote, Belgium adapted its criminal code to include the directive, making it the first country in Europe to recognize ecocide as a crime.

The ruling “shows leadership and compassion,” Mehta said. “It will establish a clear moral as well as legal ‘red line’, creating an essential steer for European industry leaders and policy-makers going forward.”

-via Grist, March 6, 2024