|
|
|
|
|
On March 8, the Sabin Center and the Environmental Defense Fund unveiled their new Inflation Reduction Act Tracker, a free tool to help states, local governments, Native American tribes, local communities, non-profit organizations, and private companies navigate the
2022 Inflation Reduction Act climate change-related provisions.
|
|
The Sabin Center and the Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment are jointly hiring for the following positions, as part of a Climate Law & Finance initiative:
- Senior Legal Researcher: We are seeking a Researcher to support a new initiative on climate law and finance. The researcher will work collaboratively with CCSI's and the Sabin Center’s Leadership and Research Staff to analyze the interrelated legal, finance, and policy pathways critical to achieving global climate goals and facilitating the energy transition.
- Senior Staff Associate: We are seeking a Staff Associate who will execute the Centers’ applied research agenda on the role of law and finance in addressing climate change and accelerating the energy transition.
More details about each position, minimum qualifications, and how to apply here.
|
|
|
Upcoming Events & Video of Past Events
|
|
Key Environmental Issues in U.S. EPA Region 2
Friday, May 19, 2023
Columbia Law School, Jerome Greene Hall, 435 West 116th Street, New York City
This biennial conference examines key and emerging environmental issues in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 2 area, which includes New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. CLE credit will be available.
Register here.
Sponsored by EPA Region 2, the environmental sections of the American, New York State, New Jersey State, and New York City Bar Associations, and the Sabin Center.
|
|
The Fourth Annual Earth Day Climate Change Symposium --
Climate Change: An Accelerating Transformation
Thursday, April 20, 2023
Format: Webcast
The Fourth Annual Earth Day Climate Change Symposium will consider the accelerating impacts of climate change and efforts to respond to it.
The program will begin with a panel that discusses aggressive efforts to respond to climate change by New York State and New York City and their global leadership in this regard. Speakers will discuss onshore and offshore renewable energy siting and development; groundbreaking NYS legislation and environmental justice; and NYC’s transition to transportation based on renewable energy.
The second panel will address the effects of climate change and efforts to respond to it at the federal and global levels. We will hear from a scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration regarding the state of the climate. We will also hear from other speakers about recent landmark federal and other legislation; the momentous draft High Seas Treaty at the United Nations to protect biodiversity in the oceans; corporate efforts to address climate change; and issues related to the supply of critical minerals for renewable energy infrastructure.
Register here.
Sponsored by New York State Bar Association, Environmental and Energy Law Section, Global Climate Change Committee; New York City Bar Association, Environmental Law Committee; Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School; Columbia Climate School, Columbia University
|
|
Law firms, law school clinics and individual lawyers are at work, on a pro bono basis, drafting and peer reviewing model laws to implement the recommendations of Michael Gerrard and John Dernbach's book Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States. These laws and other resources are posted on the web site Model Laws for Deep Decarbonization, a collaboration of the Sabin Center and Widener University Commonwealth Law School Environmental Law and Sustainability Center. Lawyers who may wish to volunteer for this Project should contact Richard Horsch.
Last month, the LPDD team published a new model law amending the definition of "Fair Market Value" in the Federal Coal Leasing Act. By modifying the definition of "Fair Market Value" under which the Bureau of Land Management may lease land for coal projects, developers will be forced to account for more potential revenues and social costs in their lease terms. The LPDD team also republished a model law recently published by the Sabin Center on Ocean Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) Research.
To receive a monthly update that summarizes the new model laws prepared by this project and lists the other resources posted on the model laws website, click here.
|
|
New on the Climate Law Blog
|
|
- Administrative Interpretation of the CLCPA, by Andrea Nishi, March 30, 2023
- The ICJ's Advisory Opinion on Climate Change: What Happens Now?, by Maria Antonia Tigre and Jorge Alejandro Carrillo Bañuelos, March 29, 2023
- Global Consensus is Emerging on Corporate Scope 3 Disclosures. Will SEC Lead or Lag? by Cynthia Hanawalt, March 28, 2023
- Beyond troubled waters? Unprecedented cross-border transportation and injection of carbon dioxide (CO2) for offshore storage shows promise, by Carolina Arlota, March 23, 2023
- Sabin Center Files Amicus Brief in Support of New GHG Vehicle Emissions Standards, by Martin Lockman and Andrea Nishi, March 13, 2023
- French NGOs Target Bank's Activities Contributing to Climate Change, by Riccardo Fornasari, March 3, 2023
|
|
Updates to the Climate Case Charts
|
|
Here are highlights of this month's climate litigation update. The full update is available here:
Hawai‘i Supreme Court Finds State Constitution’s Environmental Rights Clause Encompasses Right to a Life-Sustaining Climate System, Supporting State Rejection of Biomass Energy Deal
On March 13, 2023, the Hawai‘i Supreme Court affirmed the Public Utilities Commission’s (PUC’s) denial of approval for the energy company Hu Honua Bioenergy, LLC (Hu Honua) to provide power for Hawai‘i Island’s electric grid from a proposed biomass energy facility. The court found that the PUC had “faithfully followed” the court’s remand instructions in a 2019 decision that vacated the PUC’s 2017 approval of the deal. The 2019 decision directed the PUC to give a community action group an opportunity to “meaningfully address” the project’s potential impacts on the groups’ members right to a clean and healthful environment. The 2019 decision also instructed the PUC to give “express consideration” to greenhouse gas emissions that would result from the project, and also to whether the cost of energy was reasonable in light of potential greenhouse gas emissions and whether the deal’s terms were “prudent and in the public interest.” In its 2023 decision, the Supreme Court first found that the PUC’s consideration of pricing was appropriate, given the court’s explicit remand language and the PUC’s constitutional duty to act in the public interest. The court next rejected Hu Honua’s contention that the PUC could only compare the biomass facility’s greenhouse gas emissions and other characteristics with those of fossil fuel plants, and not with other types of renewable energy projects. The court found that Hawai‘i Legislature intended to require the PUC to consider climate change and to reduce emissions. Regarding Hu Honua’s argument that recent amendments to the PUC’s governing statute barred the PUC from considering greenhouse gas emissions from biomass, the Supreme Court noted that the governing statute defined the Hawai‘i Constitution’s “right to a clean and healthful environment, which encompasses the right to a life-sustaining climate system,” and that disregarding greenhouse gas emissions from biomass would undermine this mandate. Finally, the court rejected Hu Honua’s argument that the PUC violated the company’s due process rights, including by creating a carbon neutrality requirement. The court first noted that it was Hu Honua, not the PUC, that “introduced the idea of carbon neutrality into the proceedings” by promising to offset its greenhouse gas emissions by planting trees. The court also indicated that even if the PUC adopted a carbon neutrality standard, “it is not so clear that the agency would have erred,” given the PUC’s constitutional obligation to protect the “affirmative” and “constantly evolving” right to a life-sustaining climate system. The court cited the people of Hawai‘i’s legislative declaration of a “climate emergency” and described the “immediate threats” faced by the state, including sea level rise and ocean warming and acidification. The court stated: “The reality is that yesterday’s good enough has become today’s unacceptable. The PUC was under no obligation to evaluate an energy project conceived of in 2012 the same way in 2022. Indeed, doing so would have betrayed its constitutional duty.” Associate Justice Michael D. Wilson joined the majority’s opinion but also authored a concurring opinion holding that the right to a life-sustaining climate system was derived not only from Hawai‘i Constitution’s enumerated right to a clean and healthful environment but also from the Hawai‘i Constitution’s due process clause and public trust doctrine. Regarding due process, the concurrence stated that “[i]t is beyond cavil that a life-sustaining climate system is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty and lies ‘at the base of all our civil and political institutions.’” With respect to the public trust doctrine, the concurring opinion found that the climate system “is a ‘natural resource’ held in trust by the State for the benefit of present and future generations,” and that to act in accordance with its public trust and statutory obligations, the PUC “must make reduction of greenhouse gas emissions the primary consideration” in determining whether to approve energy deals such as the one at issue in this case. In re Hawai‘i Electric Light Co., No. SCOT-22-0000418 (Haw. Mar. 13, 2023)
UN General Assembly Adopted Resolution Requesting ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Obligations of States with Respect to Climate Change
On March 29, 2023, the 77th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted the resolution A/77/L.58, requesting an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the obligations of States with respect to climate change. The resolution was adopted by consensus. This initiative was largely led by the Government of Vanuatu, which worked with other countries to prepare a draft resolution through internal negotiations and several rounds of informal consultations with the wider UN membership.
The request for an advisory opinion acknowledges that “climate change is an unprecedented challenge of civilizational proportions and that the well-being of present and future generations of humankind depends on our immediate and urgent response to it.” The UNGA resolution also takes note of the scientific consensus expressed, inter alia, in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In particular, the UNGA underscores that anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are “the dominant cause of the global warming observed since the mid-20th century” and that human-induced climate change “has caused widespread adverse impacts and related losses and damages to nature and people.”
In this context, the UNGA recalls the importance of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement “as expressions of the determination to address decisively the threat posed by climate change.” The resolution also underscores the importance of implementing these treaties, particularly in light of the significant gap between States’ current nationally determined contributions and the emission reductions required to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C, as well as the gap between current levels of adaptation and the levels needed to respond to the adverse effects of climate change.
Therefore, in accordance with Article 96 of the Charter of the United Nations, the UNGA requests the ICJ to render an advisory opinion on the following questions:
“Having particular regard to the Charter of the United Nations, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Paris Agreement, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the duty of due diligence, the rights recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the principle of prevention of significant harm to the environment and the duty to protect and preserve the marine environment,
(a) What are the obligations of States under international law to ensure the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases for States and for present and future generations;
(b) What are the legal consequences under these obligations for States where they, by their acts and omissions, have caused significant harm to the climate system and other parts of the environment, with respect to:
(i) States, including, in particular, small island developing States, which due to their geographical circumstances and level of development, are injured or specially affected by or are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change?
(ii) Peoples and individuals of the present and future generations affected by the adverse effects of climate change?”
The UN Secretariat will communicate the resolution to the ICJ in the following weeks. Request for an advisory opinion on the obligations of States with respect to climate change (International Court of Justice)
|
|
Please send additional material for inclusion in the climate case charts to
margaret.barry@arnoldporter.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
