Vibrant Environment

The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) enjoys considerable popular support and provides enormous ecological and other benefits beyond the protection of particular species. Yet the Act is not without its skeptics—longstanding calls to overhaul the Act have only gained traction in the 115th U.S. Congress and new Donald Trump Administration.

Here at ELI, we’ve seen a growing demand for unbiased answers and analysis on how deregulatory initiatives by the Administration and Congress will impact environmental protection, governance, and the rule of law. To that end, we recently collaborated with the American Bar Association’s Civil Rights and Social Justice Section to publish an ebook to aid understanding of the legal mechanisms that the White House, federal agencies, and Congress are using to change the regulatory approach to environmental, natural resources, and health and safety protections. The book attempts to answer these questions: What are the pathways and potential impacts of these ongoing regulatory changes? What are the opportunities for the public and other stakeholders to engage relative to these initiatives?

Humans are rapidly increasing their industrial use of the ocean and its resources, resulting in great increases in underwater noise. Commercial shipping, naval sonar, seismic exploration, pile driving, acoustic deterrents for fishing, and seabed mining all produce ocean noise.

Last month, the D.C. Circuit held in a 2-1 opinion that FERC was required to consider the downstream emissions created by power plants to be served by a proposed pipeline in Florida. The case not only raises questions about the scope of FERC’s NEPA review for new natural gas pipeline projects, but also about the application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen, 541 U.S. 752 (2004).

In 2010, two sisters—ages 1 and 4—died after licensed exterminators misapplied pesticides too close to their home. In 2011, roughly 60 dead mammals and migratory birds were found on and near a private hunting preserve after pesticides were unlawfully applied in hopes of killing coyotes. And in 2015, an entire family was hospitalized, and now suffers from neurological damage, following the improper pesticide fumigation of their house. Yet, the perpetrators in each of these cases were only charged with misdemeanors.

What is the most valuable crop in California? It isn’t almonds ($5.3 billion), strawberries ($1.8 billion), or grapes ($1.3 billion), but cannabis, now worth around $17 billion annually. In fact, cannabis is presently the fastest growing industry in the United States with over 30 percent per year compound growth according to preliminary 2016 revenues reported in Colorado by the Marijuana Enforcement Division.

Even after lawmakers leave the capital for their August recess, there’s still a summer buzz in the air at ELI’s offices in Washington, D.C. From June through August, nearly every open desk is filled by a volunteer, intern, or law clerk working to further ELI’s mission and support its many programs around the world. This summer, I was fortunate enough to spend a brief three months in the nation’s capital as one of those students. My fellow interns and law clerks hailed from as far as U.C.

When a public company describes the impact of a proposed regulation, it must consider two audiences: regulators and financial markets. It would like to sway the regulator by emphasizing how stringent regulations could cause job losses or reduce investment. But it may wish to convince investors that the company will thrive in the face of any plausible regulatory outcome.

In response to reputational pressures and economic incentives, many companies tailor their product design, purchasing decisions, and management systems to reflect environmental considerations. Because consumers usually can’t observe these benefits in a company’s products or services, firms increasingly turn to environmental certification schemes or “ecolabels” to highlight their achievements.

On July 3, 2017, the D.C. Circuit ruled against the Trump Administration in Clean Air Council v. Pruitt, holding that it could not delay an EPA rule limiting methane pollution from oil and gas drilling. The 2016 rule was part of the Obama Administration’s regulatory strategy to reduce emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas roughly 25 times more powerful than carbon dioxide.