Articles Tagged "Law/Policy"

Reference

Gartzke, E. 2012. Could climate change precipitate peace? Journal of Peace Research 49: 177-192.

Background

The author writes that "an evolving consensus that the earth is becoming warmer has led to increased interest in the social consequences of climate change," and he says that "a second consensus has begun to emerge among policymakers and opinion leaders that global warming may well result in increased civil and even interstate warfare, as groups and nations compete for water, soil, or oil." Although he further notes that "while anecdote and some focused statistical research suggests that civil conflict may have worsened in response to recent climate change in developing regions, these claims have been severely criticized by other studies," citing Nordas and Gleditsch (2007), Buhaug (2010), and Buhaug et al. (2010). In addition, he states that "the few long-term macro statistical studies actually find that conflict increases in periods of climatic chill (Zhang et al., 2006, 2007; Tol and Wagner, 2010)." And he reports that "research on the modern era reveals that interstate conflict has declined in the second half of the 20th century, the very period during which global warming has begun to make itself felt (Goldstein, 2011; Hensel, 2002; Levy et al., 2001; Luard, 1986, 1988; Mueller, 2009; Pinker, 2011; Sarkees et al., 2003)."

Seal of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit- Image link

Three federal judges admit to being biased in favor of a government agency when granting a landmark decision in favor of caps and taxes on “greenhouse gas” emissions. Court rules Earth’s atmosphere does act like a greenhouse after all.

In a shock landmark decision (June 26, 2012) the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit throws out a key pro-industry petition challenging restrictions on industrial emissions of carbon dioxide and other so-called “greenhouse gases.” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson called the ruling a “strong validation” of the approach the agency has taken.

The 81-page decision affirms that on the science of man-made global warming the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is the one and only arbiter when a case goes to trial. Completely taking the EPA’s word on the science, the court was satisfied that “greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may reasonably be anticipated both to endanger public health and to endanger public welfare.”As such, say the judges, the EPA is not contravening the Clean Air Act by radically limiting industrial emissions of carbon dioxide.

Internationale Klima- und Energiekonferenz in München, Nov 2011



Uploaded by EikeKlimaEnergie on Mar 27, 2012

Spuren verwischen: Der "Weltklimarat" IPCC und sein Verständnis von Transparenz

Take time out to see this YouTube Chris talks about the FOIA issues and ClimateGate

A federal judge in Mississippi has ended a long-running suit that attempted to hold a selection of U.S. utilities and coal and oil companies responsible for flooding damage caused by Hurricane Katrina.

U.S. District Judge Louis Guirola Jr., in a decision released yesterday, dismissed Comer vs. Murphy Oil with prejudice, meaning it can’t be refiled or reconstituted. The decision should serve to preclude, other similar lawsuits accusing companies of emitting global-warming gases that cause damaging weather patterns.

Guirola dismissed the case for legal reasons — he’d already dismissed it once before, and he said the plaintiffs were barred by various legal doctrines from reviving it — but “out of an abundance of caution” he reiterated why the case shouldn’t be allowed to proceed.

Those reasons are becoming familiar in global-warming cases: Guirola ruled the case invalid because the underlying issue of global warming is a political question, best left to the legislative branch and regulators to decide. And because existing tort law requires plaintiffs to prove a more solid connection between their injuries and the actions of those they are suing than a scientifically plausible argument that one contributed to the other.

CRACKS are appearing in the state's response to rising sea levels, with one council facing potential legal action from a developer and other residents worried about planning controls and insurance risks.

Lake Macquarie Council recently updated its recommendations for about 10,000 people living up to three metres above the average sea level. All their properties could be exposed to inundation and increased flood risks by the end of the century, according to guidelines developed by the CSIRO.

But a property developer, Jeff McCloy, said he was contemplating leading a class action suit against the council, which he said was ''falling for this unjustified, worldwide idiocy about sea level rises''.

Mr McCloy recently arranged for climate change sceptics Ian Plimer, Bob Carter and David Archibald to address residents and councillors, and said the presentation seemed to convince many people there was nothing to worry about.

Climate realists testify before the Canadian Senate



International Climate Science Coalition, www.climatescienceinternational.org, has uploaded the December 15, 2011 climate science hearing before the Senate Standing Committee on Energy, Environment and Natural Resources.

Uploaded by TomHarrisICSC on 20 Dec 2011

NEWS - Energy company EDF has been fined €1.5m (£1.3m) for hacking into the computer systems of environmental campaign organisation Greenpeace.

Two high-ranking EDF employees were given prison sentences on Thursday for hiring investigators to hack into Greenpeace systems in France, Greenpeace said in a blog post on Thursday.

"The evidence presented at the trial showed that the espionage undertaken by EDF in its efforts to discredit Greenpeace was both extensive and totally illegal," Greenpeace UK's executive director, John Sauven, said in the blog post. "The company should now give a full account of the spying operation it mounted against its critics."

Investigators from private detective agency Kargus Consultants hacked into Greenpeace systems in 2006 looking for plans concerning a campaign against new EDF nuclear power plants, a French court found.

In 2006 Kargus Consultants targeted the then-campaign director Yannick Jadot with an email with a Trojan attachment, in what is known as a 'spear-phishing' attack, Greenpeace France communications officer Axel Renaudin told ZDNet UK on Friday. When Jadot opened the email, the Trojan executed, opening a backdoor for the hackers.

Click source to read FULL report from Tom Espiner

Two years ago, the Central Intelligence Agency announced it was creating a center to analyze the geopolitical ramifications of “phenomena such as desertification, rising sea levels, population shifts and heightened competition for natural resources.”

But whatever work the Center on Climate Change and National Security has done remains secret.

In response to National Security Archive scholar Jeffrey Richelson’s Freedom of Information Act request, the CIA said all of its work is “classified.”

“We completed a thorough search for records responsive to your request and located material that we determined is currently and properly classified and must be denied in its entirety,” (.pdf) Susan Viscuso, the agency’s information and privacy coordinator, wrote Richelson.

Richelson, in a Thursday telephone interview from Los Angeles, said the CIA has not released anything about its climate change research, other than its initial press release announcing the center’s founding.

“As far as I know, they have not released any of their products or anything else,” Richelson said. “There was a statement announcing its creation and that has been pretty much it.”

Steven Aftergood, who directs the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, blasted the CIA’s response to Richelson.

This afternoon I am filing a lawsuit against the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), in federal district court in the District of Columbia on behalf of The American Tradition Institute’s Environmental Law Center. On the heels of obtaining a court order earlier late last month compelling the University of Virginia to produce the long-sought 'Hockey Stick'-related records, ATI's transparency project now seeks to force NASA to release ethics records for taxpayer-funded global warming activist Dr. James Hansen, specifically those pertaining to his outside employment, revenue generation, and advocacy activities.

What we are trying to determine is whether NASA approved Hansen's widespread, well-documented, high-profile and, it runs out, extremely lucrative "outside employment and other activities", permission for which must be obtained in writing, in advance. Public financial disclosures and other documents reveal that he has received at least $1.2 million in the past four years, more than doubling the taxpayer-funded salary of this senior public servant.

This money comes on top of and, more troubling, is all "related to" and is sometimes even expressly for his taxpayer-funded employment, which commenced when Hansen stepped up his "global warming" activism from his NASA perch.

Environment: The Supreme Court hears a case brought by six states over whether federal courts or the EPA should be setting emission standards to fight global warming. Actually, the correct answer is neither.

We are a litigious society and will sue over most anything. But at least it makes sense when one party is genuinely injured and seeks redress from an identifiable party that is arguably at fault.

Even in matters of science and industry, both harm and responsibility must be proved.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments in a case brought by six states, the city of New York and three conservation groups that want to be able to continue their suit against four private electric utilities and the federal Tennessee Valley Authority to force cuts in greenhouse gas emissions from their power plants.

So where, in this case, is the demonstrable harm?