Could a Riparian Conservation Network increase the ecological resilience of public lands?

A new article suggests river corridors could leverage existing policies to build habitat connectivity

As we try to protect biological diversity for the future, a perpetual challenge is ensuring that the strategies we adopt today will continue to work in the face of changing conditions. How can we design conservation approaches that will be resilient in the face of environmental challenges that will only become more severe in coming years? In a newly published article, we* ask whether our network of rivers might provide a solution. We examine the possibility that a Ri...

CONTINUE READING

A Water Rights Database For California’s Future

A proposal to modernize information for management of water resources

In April, a group of us (Richard Roos-Collins, Michael Kiparsky, Nell Green Nylen, Michael Hanemann, and Holly Doremus) wrote a document arguing for the need to develop a more complete and functional source of legal information on California’s water rights. Since then, this proposal has been circulated widely among the California water community. In the spirit of broadening the discussion of these ideas, we post the original text below. The full document contains th...

CONTINUE READING

Industry Will Try To Keep The Clean Power Plan From Taking Effect Pending Court Decision on Its Legality

Lobbyist Spin Has Begun

It's no secret that the minute the Clean Power Plan is finalized (expected in the next couple of months), industry will sue to invalidate it.  But before a court decides whether the Plan --  which is designed to cut carbon emissions from the power sector by 30 percent -- is legal under the Clean Air Act, industry will try to keep it from ever going into effect.   In legal parlance, industry will seek an order from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal to "stay" the impleme...

CONTINUE READING

Michigan v. EPA: Policymaking in the Guise of Statutory Interpretation

In Michigan v. EPA, the majority followed its own policy views, not those in the statute.

The majority opinion by Justice Scalia has gotten most of the attention.  Most notably, he wrote that "[o]ne would not say that it is even rational, never mind "appropriate", to impose billions of dollars in economic costs for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits."  Indeed, "[n]o regulation is 'appropriate' if it does significantly more harm than good." Later in the opinion, Justice Scalia again faulted the agency's failure to "ensure that the costs are no...

CONTINUE READING

Injecting Earthquakes

The scientific evidence shows a clear link between injection wells and earthquakes. The legal consequences are less clear.

A recent study of injection wells and earthquakes got a lot of press, but the reports missed an important nuance.  The study, published in the June 19 edition of Science, found a definite connection between well injection and earthquakes.  But there was an interesting wrinkle: "The scientists found that disposal wells were 1.5 times more likely to be associated with earthquakes, although the region contains far more enhanced recovery wells. The link was strongest ...

CONTINUE READING

Saving California’s Beaches

New expert report offers recommendations for shoreline armoring management

As California’s beach goers and residents well know, erosion and climate change are already impacting the California coastline. Eighty percent of California’s coast is actively eroding, and the latest science projects that sea levels may rise up to 5 additional feet along much of the coast by the end of this century. Higher sea levels threaten coastal communities with increased risk of flooding, in­undation, storm damage, and erosion. With 85 percent of Calif...

CONTINUE READING

Interpreting Michigan v. EPA

The opinion seems likely to have very limited repercussions.

In bringing the mercury rule to the Supreme Court, industry was hoping for a ruling that EPA had to balance costs and benefits (and could only include benefits relating to mercury).  What they got was far less than that.  Here, I'd like to address some key questions about the opinion. 1.  When does EPA have to consider costs?  The Court relied heavily on the "capaciousness" of the word appropriate and its ability to encompass all relevant factors.  The broades...

CONTINUE READING

MATS Rules Declared Invalid in Michigan v. EPA, 5-4

Opinion by Scalia Based on Meaning of "Appropriate"

The U.S. Supreme Court today struck down EPA's rules governing toxic emissions from power plants.  My first take on the opinion, by Justice Scalia, is that while the outcome is bad for the agency, the reasoning appears not to be a radical departure from existing doctrine, with one worrisome tidbit thrown in.  Justice Scalia used the traditional two-step Chevron doctrine to hold that EPA should have used cost to determine whether to regulate power plant toxic emissions ...

CONTINUE READING

Mercury Rising: The Court Reverses EPA’s Regulation

This was not a great decision for EPA, but it could have been much worse.

The Court has just now decided the Michigan case, involving EPA's mercury regulation.  As Ann Carlson explained in an earlier post, a lot was at stake in the case.  The Court ruled 5-4 against EPA.  This passage seems to be key to the Court's reasoning: One would not say that it is even rational, never mind “appropriate,” to impose billions of dollars in economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits. In addition, “cost” inc...

CONTINUE READING

Will Obama Get a Fourth Major Victory Tomorrow in Michigan v. EPA?

Decision Expected Tomorrow, Written by Someone Other than Scalia

Though the monumental decisions on health care and marriage equality are behind us, tomorrow remains another big day in the Supreme Court.  Three cases remain undecided:  Glossip v. Gross (whether Oklahoma's execution methods are unconstitutional); Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (whether a state commission can draw Congressional electoral lines) and Michigan v. EPA (whether EPA's rules governing hazardous air emissions from po...

CONTINUE READING

TRENDING