Search

Discusses the environmental agenda of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Aspects of the Action Plan for California's Environment released by Schwarzenegger after announcing his candidacy in a special election on 2003; Pollution and energy provisions; Support for pollution-control rules; Appointment of Action Plan writer Terry Tamminen as the head of the California Environmental Protection Agency; Concerns about the governor's recent appointments.

A case filed in San Francisco, California, with the Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and the cities of Boulder, Colorado, and Oakland, California, as plaintiffs, seeks to force two government agencies to assess the total impact on climate of the projects they finance. Litigation may soon be the weapon of choice for those concerned about human-induced global warming. In the San Francisco case, the plaintiffs charge that the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) and the Export-Import Bank of the United States (ExIm) have provided $32 billion in loans, insurance and loan guarantees for oil pipelines, oil drilling and other fossil-fuel endeavors that will ultimately result in the emission of 32 billion tons of carbon dioxide over the life of the projects. The lawsuit does not attempt to cancel ongoing projects but asks only that OPIC and ExIm determine the "cumulative impact" on the climate of every future project. Such a review, asserts Jon Sohn of Friends of the Earth, is required by the National Environmental Policy Act. The plaintiffs are confronted with many hurdles. They will have to demonstrate that they face harm from global warming and, in particular, from the agencies' actions. The cities contend that their water supplies are in jeopardy. Scientific uncertainties over such claims can be partly overcome by aggregating harm done over a large span of space and time, contends David Grossman, a recent graduate of Yale Law School and now a law clerk in Anchorage. In a paper to be published in the 'Columbia Journal of Environmental Law,' Grossman argues that tort litigation over global warming--in which communities or states seek damages from oil companies, electric utilities and automobile manufacturers--is entirely feasible. INSET: WHOSE FAULT IS IT ANYWAY?.

On 7 July 2004, the California's Air Resources Board received their final public comments on a draft proposal to regulate emissions of greenhouse gases from motor vehicles. Their final "Environmental Justice Workshop on Climate Change" was held on 13 July 2004, ending a series of workshops that offered communities an opportunity to discuss the proposed regulation, which is designed to reduce GHG emissions by 30 percent. The regulation is driven by California's Vehicle Global Warming Law, which requires the state to "develop and adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles" by January 1, 2005.

The article reports on the move of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to deny California's request for a waiver to regulate greenhouse gases (GHGs) from motor vehicles in the U.S. It says that the decision of the EPA administrator has prompted lawsuits by California, 18 other states, and several environmental groups. It is noted that California requested the waiver to curb GHG emissions to combat global warming.

The article discusses the role of women in the environmental movement. Since 1960s, a raft of capable, dynamic activists and scientists who happen to be female have changed the face of the environmental movement. There are certainly realms within the environmental activist world where women are influential, respected, even powerful. The late Judi Bari, for instance, a Northern California activist, changed the face of what was a rather male-dominated Earth First! While denigrating the concerns of their sisters about the systemic sexism within the movement, male activists would use the word "rape" with some abandon to describe, say, a strip mine or a clearcut. To call environmental destruction "rape" is to achieve the startling and counterintuitive accomplishment of trivializing both sins. The metaphor relies on the equation of women to passive, nonsentient resources, and it masks the true nature and depth of the damage to the landscape. It assigns women the status of scenery, and the environmentally concerned, who would husband that violated landscape, are cast as the true victims.

The article focuses on the protection and renovation of the Los Angeles River in Los Angeles, California. It states that paddling in the river is prohibited because technically, it is not a river but a flood-control facility. It mentions that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has provided special protection rules for the river and the government had adopted a 2 billion renovation plan. It adds that the master plan for its revitalization prescribe parkland and bicycle paths.

The article reports on the adoption of a global warming plan by the California Air Resources Board in December 2008 to help businesses and individuals comply with the Global Warming Solutions Act passed in 2006. The plan consists of 31 new rules that are expected to change how people travel, businesses use electricity and utilities produce power. The law mandates the state to cut greenhouse gas emission to 1990 levels by 2020. But opponents said that the new rules will lead to job losses, energy price increase and discourage companies from the state.

The article reports on the proposal to build a 824-acre training base by the Blackwater USA, near Potrero, California. The projects plans to build shooting ranges and other facilities that could impact critical wildlife habitat. The Sierra Club's San Diego Chapter and other environmentalist groups are concerned that the project could contaminate the local aquifer and are working up to respond to the environmental impact report. According to Jeanette Hartman, club member, the place is an enormous agricultural source.

The article discusses the politics of climate control and the initiatives of the State of California to respond to the plea of Al Gore for the world community to take decisive action to reduce emissions. California sued the feds and demanded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to permit the state to limit auto emissions. 700 mayors also signed an agreement that obligates cities to achieve 7% reduction by 2012. Despite the actions, many acknowledges that the efforts are insufficient to avoid significant consequences from global warming.

The article reports that San Francisco, California Mayor Gavin Newsom has signed an ordinance to reduce the single largest source of diesel pollution in the city, namely bulldozers, cranes and other heavy construction equipment. According to the rule, city contractors performing major projects will be required to use cleaner equipment and fuel that contains a minimum of 20 percent biodiesel. Also, contractors must notify schools and hospitals near construction sites before starting a project.

The article presents an interview with Arnold Schwarzenegger, an environmentalist and the Governor of California in 2007. It includes background information on Schwarzenegger and his career in politics, as well as his views on the environment, environmental protection and the state's environmental policies.

The article informs that the Planning and Conservation League (PCL), National Wildlife Federation's California affiliate, has thwarted attempts of developers to weaken the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Since the late 1960s, the PCL has been involved with the establishment and defense of the CEQA--California's premier environmental law. The CEQA protects species and special habitat areas from adverse development by requiring environmental impact reports, public input and mitigation measures to offset ecological degradation. Earlier this year, developers sought to weaken the CEQA, but their attack was blunted by the PCL and a diverse coalition of environmentalists, trade unions, social justice groups and affordable housing proponents.

Comments on the environmental policies of California. Absurdity of the laws; Factors that influence the policies; Source of timber and oil of California.

Presents the thoughts of the author about a environmental initiative, 'Big Green,' that California voters will decide on. Details of the proposal, including stringent controls on pesticides and preservation of redwood stands; Industry's prediction of economic disaster if the initiative is passed; Other California initiatives that show environmental protection is not economic suicide, including the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act; Effect of Big Green on the state's trading partners; Effects of Big Green on the federal Clean Air Law.

The article discusses the increased workload of law firms with California environmental practices due to the state's implementation of new emission regulations in 2013. It describes legal work arising from the state's first-ever carbon emissions auction in November 2012, including counseling and advising clients about offset programs. The expectation that such legal work would become more widespread if other states implement new environmental regulations is also mentioned.

The article offers information about the on-site audits of the municipal stormwater programs in Los Angeles and Long Beach in California. On May 2007, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 9 and the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board conducted an on-site audit of the municipal stormwater programs in the area wherein they carried out 55 individual stormwater inspection of port tenants. After which, the agency issued an audit report followed by 20 administrative orders to facilities at the ports for non-compliance with the state's industrial general permit and it mandated port tenants to correct all their deficiencies within 30 days and submit a revised stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) to EPA within 60 days.

The article reports that California plans to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2007 to force the EPA to act on the state's plans to impose restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions from new trucks and cars. It includes an analysis of the complex legal issues surrounding the possible lawsuit, as well as the issues' implications for environmental policy.

The article reports that the U.S. District Court judge in Los Angeles, California has rejected the motion of the Kern County to dismiss the lawsuit that challenges the region's ban on land application of biosolids considering that it should not have been filed in Los Angeles. The court ruled that it was ok to file the case in the said state since the effect of the ban would handicap government agencies in the Los Angeles area. Furthermore, it has been noted that the lawsuit seeks to alter a ballot initiative passed by Kern County voters that limits the plaintiffs from recycling biosolids at two farm sites in the County including a 5,000 acre farm owned by Los Angeles.

The article informs that copper pipe advocates are turning a safety debate launched by California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors (CalPASC) into a question of the benefits of chloramine-treated water. CalPASC, a Sacramento-based trade organization for residential trade contractors, claims that chloramines contribute to pitting, pinholes and potential failure of copper pipe. The group wants to allow plastic piping in California's uniform building code. It claims the move would save $100 million annually in decreased labor and materials and avoid increased insurance costs linked to leaky copper pipes.