Browsing by Subject "climate change mitigation"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Localizing Climate Change Action
    (Minnesota Journal of Law, Science and Technology, 2013-07-01) Dellinger, Myanna
    Waiting for national- and supranational-level actors to reach a broadly based and substantively effective agreement on climate change mitigation is like waiting for Godot—unlikely to happen, at least at a substantively early enough point in time. The December 2012 negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) umbrella yet again demonstrated the problem in seeking widely accepted action from close to two hundred nations with widely divergent interests in climate change and the related underlying issues. This article adds new value to existing scholarship by conducting original research into select climate initiatives at the sub-national, sub-state level in order to find out whether it is worth pursuing climate change action at this level instead. The article posits that in times with little or severely delayed climate change action by national and supranational actors, it is worth pursuing climate change action at the local—but not the purely private—level. After identifying what “success” means in the climate change arena, the article analyzes the potential for both substantive and procedural success presented by select local initiatives. Some of these feature traditional adversarial enforcement methods, some feature modern collaborative-style enforcement, some feature no enforcement at all, and one is a reporting program with mandatory implications. This article demonstrates how action at the scaled-down level can be effective whether traditional adversarial, or more collaborative goal enforcement methods are applied, and perhaps even if no enforcement methods are applied at all. The article builds on the author’s parallel project, An Unstoppable Tide: Creating Environmental and Human Rights Law from the Bottom Up. This article analyzes bottom-up, polycentric developments within national and international environmental and human rights law in general. It argues that bottom-up, polycentric action presents viable alternatives to traditional top-down action within these areas and presents a set of guidelines for the development and enforcement of law that apply to action within climate change and thus to this article as well.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Responsible, Renewable, and Redesigned: How the Renewable Energy Movement Can Make Peace with the Endangered Species Act
    (Minnesota Journal of Law, Science and Technology, 2014-02-20) Robbins, Kalyani
    One of the most promising routes to a sustainable energy future, as well as climate change mitigation, is the development of renewable energy sources such as wind, solar energy, and hydropower. Indeed, scientists have proposed plans to move completely (100 percent!) to these energy sources within a couple of decades. Mark Z. Jacobson and M.A. Delucchi, scientists from Stanford and U.C. Davis, have outlined a plan to achieve this goal, thereby “eliminating all fossil fuels.” Hydroelectric power already provides almost one-fifth of the world’s electricity, and wind and solar development is rapidly picking up as well. However, before we leave our worries behind and celebrate, we must resolve one potentially difficult issue for renewable energy, especially these three favored brands. They conflict with another important goal, that of protecting biodiversity. Wind, solar, and hydro energy all have one thing in common: they destroy habitat as well as directly kill wildlife, including listed endangered species and their habitat. Can these problems be reconciled with the movement toward renewable energy, allowing us to partake of its many benefits? At least for now, we regularly see renewable energy progress impeded by the need for Endangered Species Act compliance. The ESA has presented itself as a potentially catastrophic obstacle to renewable energy development. The time has come to think about how we might maximize our access to renewable energy while minimizing its impacts on vulnerable species. This Essay will first review the existing conflicts between endangered species and these three sources of renewable energy. This will be followed by analysis of the potential for harmonizing each energy source with the dictates of the Endangered Species Act, concluding with specific proposals for redesigning our methods of harvesting these forms of renewable energy. As one example, innovators have designed impressive new wind-harvesting technologies that are less dangerous to birds and bats without sacrificing efficiency. I propose that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service incorporate a preference for wildlife-protective technologies into the regional incidental take permitting requirements, at least for certain higher-risk landscapes. The ultimate goal of the piece is to analyze the extent to which it is possible to use each form of renewable energy without significant ecosystem impacts, to generate somewhat of a ranking of preferred modes of development, and to seek the best path (in relation to wildlife) to a renewable energy future. Such a future is itself essential to biodiversity, so the interests must be harmonized.