Environment


…headlines this article.

See here and here.

See here.

(1) A Conn. v. AEP decision soon? Will SCOTUS take the case?

(2) An update on the climate meetings in Cancun.  But I don’t see how the U.S. can have such broad international goals given the current domestic politics of climate change.

See here.  This press relaese uses loftier language than the actual opinion, but the crops must be removed from the ground.

 

I just finished reading “The Town That Food Saved” by Ben Hewitt.  It’s a must read for Vermonters who want to know more about the agricultural entrepreneurs in and near Hardwick, Vermont (enterprises like High Mowing Organic Seeds, Pete’s Greens, Claire’s, and the Center for Agricultural Economy).  I enjoyed the book both because it’s nice to read about a community in your home state, and because Hewitt recognizes the criticism placed upon high-priced organic artisanal food (something I discussed in an earlier post), and tries to define a successful localized sustainable food system (e.g., economic vitality to small-scale producers, it must feed locals, based on sunshine rather than fossil fuels).  Unfortunately, the issue of price/affordability remains, and in his book (and in my own work), there remains no answer of how to make healthy sustainable food more affordable in the face of industrial agriculture.  At the end of the book, Hewitt seems to suggest that an economic collapse of the industrial food model may result in price reorganization, but I’m more skeptical of such a collapse and instead have come to belief that big business (e.g., Wal-Mart) will instead seek to control the organic market where these large firms then bring smaller farms under their control by dictating production quantities and growing conditions.

Finally, yesterday I posted about the new Food Safety Bill passed by the Senate.  It seems Hewitt has his own take on the bill.

Green reports that the InterAcademy Medical Panel is urging a low-carbon diet and lifestyle.  This should come as no surprise, but perhaps is long overdue.  Many things that are ‘low-carbon’ are much healthier than the alternatives (and both healthier for your personal biology and the environment).  Examples abound: red meat v. chicken, chicken v. vegetable, walk v. drive, etc.  Sometimes the choices aren’t so clear.

Sweden, with it’s new dietary guidelines that take the environment into account, is on the cutting edge.  These recommendations have been suggested for a whole host of environmental reasons in addition to acknowledged health benefits.  For example, the guidelines account for the high climate impact of beef due to methane released in cattle digestion, the depletion of many fish stocks, the energy-heavy refrigerated transport required by delicate fruits and vegetables,  the fact that fiber-rich root vegetables are more likely to be grown outdoors than in greenhouses requiring fossil fuels, that water-soaked rice fields produce more greenhouse gases than potato farms, that oil palms are often cultivated on former rainforest lands, and even the high carbon footprint of plastic water bottles.

The Vermont Journal of Environmental Law invites you to its 2011 Symposium:

China’s Environmental Governance: Global Challenges and Comparative Solutions

中国的环境治理:全球挑战及解决方案比较

In the article “Importing Coal, China Burns It as Others Stop,” the Times reports:

Even as developed countries close or limit the construction of coal-fired power plants out of concern over pollution and climate-warming emissions, coal has found a rapidly expanding market elsewhere: Asia, particularly China.

I just finished my talk on “Climate Policy and US-China Relations” in downtown Salt Lake City.  I really didn’t know what to expect in terms of discussing climate change at a law firm in Utah.  All in all it went OK, and the view of the mountains from the 22nd floor offices of Holland & Hart was absolutely spectacular.   I had anticipated at least one climate skeptic and had prepared a response but no such questions arose.  Instead most folks seems interested in (1) my argument that the Chinese have accepted a cold and Darwinist reality that only economic powers will have the resources to adapt to climate change and thus China sees no need to curb their emissions or limit economic growth, and (2) whether China, and the U.S., are actively preparing climate adaptation measures and projects.

All is all, I’m very much enjoying my time at the University of Utah and the Stegner Center.  It’s great to meet environmental law professors at another school, and I’ve been able to catch up with some old friends as well.

« Previous PageNext Page »