Remove 2010 Remove Government Remove Precautionary Principle
article thumbnail

An Update on the Evolving Legal Landscape for Ocean-Based Carbon Dioxide Removal: Key Outcomes of the October 2023 Meeting of the Parties to the London Convention and Protocol

Law Columbia

Given this, over the last century, a large body of international law has been developed to govern ocean-based activities. In 2010, the parties adopted an assessment framework for determining whether a particular ocean fertilization project involves “legitimate scientific research,” and thus may be allowed.

article thumbnail

The Rights of Nature — Can an Ecosystem Bear Legal Rights?

Law Columbia

Over the last decade, courts, legislatures and various bodies of government in countries around the world have sought and won ecosystem protection through nature rights. In 2010, the City Council of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania unanimously passed an ordinance recognizing the Rights of Nature as part of a ban on shale gas drilling and fracking.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Nuclear Plant Closures And Renewables Increase Electricity Prices & Unreliability, Testifies Michael Shellenberger to U.S. Senate

Environmental Progress

23] In response to Fukushima, the Japanese government shut down its nuclear plants and the cost of electricity went up. But given the fungible nature of silicon, some fear the Chinese government could evade such controls. [36] In Germany, the government has had to resort to various mechanisms to prevent utilities from going bankrupt.

article thumbnail

February 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Law Columbia

Divided Ninth Circuit Said Juliana Plaintiffs Lacked Standing to Press Constitutional Climate Claims Against Federal Government. Ninth Circuit Heard Oral Argument in California Local Government Cases; Fossil Fuel Companies Said Juliana Decision Supported Their Position. Environmental Council of Sacramento v. County of Sacramento , No.

2020 40