Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines six attributes of resilience for watershed governance: inclusive participation, shared understanding, inclusion of ecosystem services, strong leadership, institutional flexibility, and decentralized systems. It emphasizes managing for change rather than against it, using tools like the Social-Ecological Inventory and historical profiling to build trust and adaptability in social-ecological systems.

Earthjustice, representing a coalition of environmental and community groups, urges the City of Oakland to reject the development of a coal export terminal at the former Oakland Army Base. The letter asserts that the project would disproportionately burden the low-income, predominantly African American community of West Oakland with particulate matter and diesel pollution, while violating California's greenhouse gas reduction goals. It argues that proposed mitigations, such as covered rail cars, are ineffective and that the project is an economic risk due to declining global coal demand. Finally, the document claims the project lacks necessary environmental review under CEQA and NEPA and that the City possesses the legal authority to ban the terminal to protect public health.

The brief, submitted by Consumers Union of United States, Inc., Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility, and Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., supports the denial of a preliminary injunction against Vermont's Act 120. It contends that GE food labeling is a global norm, adopted by over 60 countries and sanctioned by the Codex Alimentarius Commission. The authors argue that the law serves substantial state interests, including public health and environmental protection, and that compliance costs—specifically through nationwide relabeling—are minimal, one-time expenses that do not constitute irreparable harm.

The report documents a significant decline in power plant-related health impacts and emissions in the U.S. and the RGGI region between 2004 and 2012, attributing these gains to stringent emission controls, the transition from coal to natural gas, and renewable energy policies.

The report argues that TTIP's regulatory cooperation provisions, primarily based on EU proposals, would institutionalize oversight of US state-level legislation and regulations by federal and international bodies. This framework would likely lead to 'regulatory chill' through onerous procedural requirements, such as early warning systems and trade impact assessments, which favor industry influence over public interest. The document highlights that US states often act as the primary regulators of toxic chemicals and pesticides when federal action is lax, and that TTIP's goal of 'regulatory compatibility' could effectively set federal or international standards as a ceiling, preventing states from adopting more protective measures. It specifically warns that such mechanisms could be used to challenge state-level bans on substances like Bisphenol A (BPA) or pesticide residue monitoring programs in California.

A joint statement from the Attorneys General of New York, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont urging the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish formal emission standards and guidelines for methane in the oil and gas sector following the publication of five technical white papers.

CIEL argues that TTIP would allow the chemical industry to weaken safety regulations and limit access to critical health and safety data. The statement highlights the divergence between the U.S. risk-based approach and the EU's hazard-based REACH system, asserting that regulatory harmonization would likely result in lower standards. CIEL also warns that Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms would enable corporations to bypass domestic courts and challenge public interest laws, creating a 'regulatory chilling effect'.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) warns that TTIP may hinder public health and safety goals by promoting regulatory harmonization and mutual recognition that could lower chemical safety standards. The document highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH approach and the US's risk-based TSCA approach, arguing that trade-driven 'regulatory coherence' often results in a 'lowest-common denominator' outcome. It further cautions against investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which could allow corporations to sue governments over environmental laws, and warns that TTIP could preempt protective sub-national regulations in the US and EU. Finally, it suggests that a US-EU agreement could negatively influence the development of chemical regulations in other regions, such as the BRIICS countries.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), on behalf of several environmental organizations, warns the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance that TTIP may prioritize trade interests over public health. The document highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH regulation and the U.S.'s risk-based Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), arguing that harmonization or mutual recognition could lead to a 'lowest-common denominator' approach to chemical safety. It specifically opposes investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which it claims allow corporations to sue governments over public interest laws, and warns that TTIP could preempt protective sub-federal laws in the U.S. and national laws in EU member states. Finally, it suggests that a restrictive TTIP could discourage other nations, particularly BRIICS countries, from adopting more stringent chemical safety standards.

The document warns that TTIP may prioritize trade interests over public health by promoting regulatory harmonization and mutual recognition that could lower chemical safety standards in the U.S. and EU. It specifically contrasts the EU's hazard-based REACH regulation with the U.S.'s risk-based TSCA approach, arguing that mutual recognition would effectively erase protections for chemicals restricted in only one jurisdiction. The author also cautions against investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, which could allow corporations to sue governments over public interest laws, and warns that TTIP could preempt protective sub-federal or sub-regional laws. Finally, the statement suggests that a low-standard TTIP could chill the development of stringent chemical regulations in other regions, such as the BRIICS countries.

The document warns that TTIP may prioritize trade over public health by promoting regulatory harmonization and mutual recognition that could weaken chemical safety standards. It highlights the divergence between the EU's hazard-based REACH approach and the US's risk-based TSCA approach, arguing that mutual recognition would effectively erase protections unique to one jurisdiction. The author also cautions against investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and the preemption of sub-national laws, while noting that TTIP could negatively influence chemical regulations in non-member countries like the BRIICS nations.

The Clean Air Task Force criticizes the EPA's 'Boiler MACT' rule for weakening emission limits and failing to reflect best performers. The organization calls for the upcoming Power Plant Air Toxics Proposal to implement rigorous, state-of-the-art standards for utility steam generating units burning coal and oil, noting that the EPA and other bodies have sufficient data to regulate mercury, heavy metals, and acid gases.

The document examines the technology and global status of offshore wind energy, noting that while Europe leads in operational capacity, the United States has significant untapped potential. It details the technical requirements for different water depths, the regulatory frameworks in countries like Denmark, and the specific siting and permitting complexities in the U.S. The text also addresses public concerns regarding tourism, wildlife, and military radar, while highlighting the economic benefits in terms of job creation and greenhouse gas reduction.

Using GIS methodology and 2006 census data, the document identifies that approximately 19 million people in the 23 coastal states of the conterminous U.S. live within 1 km of the shoreline, and 11.6 million live below a three-meter elevation. Florida, Louisiana, and New York have the highest absolute numbers of people living below 3 meters, while states like Rhode Island and Maine have high relative shares of their population within 1 km of the coast. These populations are identified as highly vulnerable to the combined effects of projected sea-level rise—estimated by the IPCC to be 18-59 cm by 2100—and increased cyclone activity.

The document details research by Nina Lam and her team at Louisiana State University using GIS and 2006 census data to map population vulnerability to sea-level rise and storms in 23 US coastal states. It finds that approximately 19 million people live within 1 km of the coast and 11.6 million live in areas below 3 meters elevation, with Florida, Louisiana, and New York having the highest numbers of vulnerable residents.

The World Resources Institute analysis finds that while existing federal and state tools can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, even the most ambitious 'Go-Getter' scenario falls short of the U.S. Copenhagen pledge to reduce emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. The report models three levels of regulatory ambition—Lackluster, Middle-of-the-Road, and Go-Getter—across key sectors including power plants, transportation, and industry. It concludes that additional legislative action is necessary to meet international climate targets and the long-term goal of 80 to 95 percent reductions by 2050.

The document identifies approximately 2 million mobile homes built before 1976 as the "worst housing stock" in the U.S., noting they are energy-inefficient and often house low-income, elderly, or disabled residents. It highlights that these structures are often ineligible for traditional weatherization programs and proposes the Energy Efficient Manufactured Housing Act of 2009 to provide rebates for ENERGY STAR qualified homes. The text details the differences between mobile, manufactured, and modular homes, and provides demographic data on residents of pre-1980 manufactured housing.

The clean car standards, initiated by California's AB 1493 and adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), comprise regulations for air quality, global warming, and zero-emission vehicles. These standards aim for a 30% reduction in global warming pollution from new vehicles by 2016 and are more stringent than federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, targeting a fleet average fuel economy equivalent of 39.2 mpg by 2020 compared to the federal 35 mpg. As of January 2009, 13 states and the District of Columbia had adopted these standards, which are projected to reduce cumulative global warming emissions by 451 million metric tons of CO2E by 2020 across those 15 jurisdictions.

The report argues that RGGI's design, which caps emissions only for power plants within participating states, creates a price advantage for imported electricity from coal-heavy states like West Virginia and Pennsylvania. This 'leakage' is exacerbated by excess capacity in existing coal plants and planned transmission upgrades that facilitate power flow from west to east. The authors suggest that RGGI states should implement retail-level carbon caps, prohibit contracts with high-emission plants, and prioritize transmission projects aligned with climate goals to prevent the expansion of coal-based power.

Friends of the Earth welcomes the Supreme Court's decision to review a 2003 EPA ruling that denied the agency's authority to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. The organization argues that the lack of regulation has coincided with a 16 percent increase in global warming emissions since 1990 and contributed to severe weather events and economic losses, such as the $57.6 billion in insurance losses from 2005 hurricanes.