Should We Allow Development in National Parks?
If I were pressed to state my favorite place in the world, coming right at the top of the list would be the Wawona Hotel, in Yosemite National Park. Not only is it inside Yosemite, but it is a historic hotel, originally built in 1879, and possessing all kinds of retro features as well as good restaurant, an excellent piano bar, great views etc. etc. And in fact one of the best things about Yosemite is just how much of it is developed -- there's the whole Yosemite Vi...
CONTINUE READINGDefending the “green guinea pig”
Just a quick post to point out my UCLA colleague Matt Kahn's piece, in the Christian Science Monitor, defending California's AB 32 climate regulations from a recent Wall Street Journal editorial (sub. req'd.) that maligns the state's approach. Apparently the WSJ relies on a long-debunked estimate of the costs to households from California's program, an estimate that (among other flaws) adds together all costs of AB 32 but excludes the value of all energy savings....
CONTINUE READINGIs California’s Anti-Sprawl Law Worth the Investment?
This past Friday, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) approved the very first Sustainable Communities Strategy in the state as part of its regional transportation plan. The strategy document is the critical planning piece mandated by California's anti-sprawl law, SB 375. As I discussed over the summer, SANDAG's plan meets its greenhouse gas reduction goals largely through congestion management and decreased ridership from the down economy. It does not f...
CONTINUE READINGNEWS FLASH: D.C. Circuit Appeal of GHG Rules
According to E&E News, the D.C. Circuit has set oral argument for Feb. 28 and Feb. 29 in the complex legal challenges to EPA's endangerment finding and initial batch of rules regulating greenhouse gases. As I've written previously, I consider the endangerment-finding a slam dunk; the tougher issue is the "tailoring" rule that exempts smaller sources from the initial round of regulation. Industry is attacking the exemption, which is a bit ironic since it is a pro-...
CONTINUE READINGThe Case for Cap-and-Trade
Dan asked for a vote, and being a good Legal Planetary citizen, I responded -- voting very reluctantly for cap-and-trade. The biggest difficulty, as is the case with most polls, lies in the phrasing of the question: "all things considered" what is "the best strategy" for controlling greenhouse gases. The problem with this locution -- perhaps unavoidable -- is that while a carbon tax might be the best overall strategy, cap-and-trade is more feasible politically. I...
CONTINUE READINGWhat is the Best Approach to Controlling Carbon? You Be the Judge.
There's a lot of disagreement about the best approach to controlling carbon. We thought it might be a good idea to find out what you, our readers, think about the issue. Here's a quick poll: [polldaddy poll=5632574]...
CONTINUE READINGNice to know I’m sober
Today the Supreme Court denied certiorari in the case known to that Court as Stewart & Jasper Orchards v. Salazar. So why the headline? This is the commerce clause challenge to ESA protection for the Delta smelt, rejected by the Ninth Circuit this past spring under the name San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority v. Salazar. At the time I expressed confidence that the Court would "leave this case alone." Ten days ago, when co-blogger Rick Frank and I appeared ...
CONTINUE READINGMore On the Republican Anti-Fact Shield
So after I posted my tantrum about George Will the other day, I felt a little guilty. Maybe I had been too hard on The Tory Bowtie. After all, maybe his putting "facts" in scare quotes was just a slip. Then I saw this piece on the Washington Post editorial page by Republican pollster Ed Rogers, on what the Republican base wants from a candidate. His words, not mine: Even though Cain won’t be the nominee, his candidacy tells us a lot about the psychology of GOP ...
CONTINUE READINGA Completely Uninteresting Story
The Wall Street Journal editorial board claims that California's new cap-and-trade regulations will cost each consumer $3,800 a year and calls it creeping Stalinism. As my UCLA (and UCLAW!) colleague Matt Kahn gently and genially points out, the Journal's editors are engaging in cranial-rectal fusion. In other news, dog bites man, the sun rises in the east, and the weather is better in California....
CONTINUE READINGTrolling for Anti-Environmental Plaintiffs
A reader sent me a an email from the Coalition of Energy Users trying to find plaintiffs for a challenge to AB 32 implementation. CEU claims to be a grassroots group that does not have a deep-pocket funding source, and that may be true. On the other hand, its interests are so precisely aligned with the oil and coal industries that it's hard not to wonder a bit. (For example, they want to abolish the California air board entirely, and they are vehemently opposed to ...
CONTINUE READING