In the Harvard Law Review Forum, Professor Ann Carlson explains how a focus on California can help President Obama to fulfill his pledge to combat climate change through executive action.
|
In this two-page recap of our report from August 2011, we review the California cap-and-trade program as adopted and find our conclusions still apply: the California Air Resources Board has designed a cap-and-trade program that should avoid gaming and market manipulation problems sometimes seen in other programs.
|
The Emmett Center partners with NRDC on a new study analyzing the benefits of smart roofing options for Southern California. Looking Up
concludes that green roofs and cool roofs would save energy and money,
reduce global warming pollution, and relieve stress on California’s
limited fresh water supply. Coauthored by Cara Horowitz, the study quantifies these benefits and makes policy recommendations for promoting smart roofs.
|
California faces crucial questions about how to spend proceeds from its cap-and-trade auctions. This paper assesses legal constraints on AB 32 auction revenue allocation that derive from the statute itself or from California’s constitutional restrictions on the use of regulatory fees. We make recommendations about the relative risks of approaches to allocating AB 32 state auction proceeds
|
Approximately 27 trillion pounds of chemicals are produced or imported into the United States every year, more than one trillion of them in California alone. In the face of relative inaction at the federal level, state governments have moved to address hazardous chemical use. Our third Pritzker Brief evaluates California's green chemistry legislation (AB 1879), identifying four critical flaws that threaten to undermine its success. Recommended revisions to the law are discussed. These recommendations include: review of new chemicals and new uses before introduction into commerce; required disclosure of chemical data by product manufacturers; and authorization of a regulatory fee to adequately fund California's green chemistry program.
|
In our second Pritzker Brief, Cara Horowitz explains how installing cool roofs in Los Angeles could improve public health, combat climate change, reduce energy demand, and save money.
|
Our ninth paper of this series discusses how California can steer large-scale renewable development without depleting the state's prime agricultural and biological resources.
|
In our inaugural Pritzker Brief, Rhead Enion describes the importance of realigning California's water regulation to better manage groundwater. Read more about the Pritzker Environmental Law and Policy Briefs here.
|
California's long-term prosperity is vulnerable to climate change, energy insecurity, environmental threats to public health, and a growing scarcity of key resources. Governor Brown has a tremendous opportunity to build on the state's past environmental successes, bringing enormous benefits to our economy and public health.
Our Blueprint describes three key areas that Governor Brown must focus on to ensure a healthy environmental future for all Californians. He must strengthen California's foundation for environmental protection. He must promote specific initiatives to address climate and energy instability. And he must advance cost-effective initiatives in traditional areas of environmental concern, such as water quality, water supply, coastal resources, chemical risks, air quality and biodiversity.
|
Proposition 26 proposes to expand the definition of a “tax” under California law. As a result of this expansion, some fees and other charges imposed by the state or by cities or counties could no longer be enacted by a simple majority vote of the Legislature. Instead, a 2/3 supermajority vote would be required—the same vote now required to pass a budget or a new tax.
We have taken a careful look at the measure’s language and its impacts on environmental and public health programs in California, and have concluded that Proposition 26 would erect significant barriers to funding many of these programs in the future. This could have substantial and wide-ranging impacts on implementation of the state’s health, safety and environmental laws.
|