POPULARITY
4 episodes with climate change law
3 episodes with climate change law
3 episodes with climate change law
5 episodes with climate change law
3 episodes with climate change law
2 episodes with climate change law
2 episodes with climate change law
2 episodes with climate change law
2 episodes with climate change law
The day 65-year-old Julie Leon died was the hottest day ever recorded in Washington State history. Her death was officially ruled as hyperthermia, or overheating. Officially, more than 100 people died in the state due to that extreme 2021 heat wave, but many experts believe the number of deaths exceeds 400. Last week, Julie’s daughter, Misti Leon, filed a lawsuit, pointing the finger at who she thinks is responsible: big oil. The lawsuit claims that oil and gas companies have been knowingly misleading the public for more than 50 years about the effects of fossil fuels on the climate. It says this deception has made them trillions of dollars, while leading to the deaths of people like Julie Leon. Guest: Korey Silverman-Roati, a Senior Fellow at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School Related Links: Oil companies face a wrongful death suit tied to climate change Leon v. Exxon Complaint PDF Oil Companies Are Sued Over Death of Woman in 2021 Heat Wave Thank you to the supporters of KUOW, you help make this show possible! If you want to help out, go to kuow.org/donate/soundsidenotes Soundside is a production of KUOW in Seattle, a proud member of the NPR Network. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
A recent legal judgment could force Greenpeace to pay $667 million in defamation and vandalism-related damages, from the 2016 protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline leading environmentalists to worry that the ruling could have a chilling effect on climate activism. Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, shares his legal analysis of the case, and what it could mean for the environment.
The 20th episode in this series focuses on “The Rise of Climate Litigation,” featuring Michael Gerrard, Professor, Founder, and Faculty Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, in conversation with William F. Tarantino, partner in the Climate Change and Environmental Litigation + Regulatory practices at MoFo.
I'd like to report a murder. Trump's fossil lobby wants to strangle American climate science. You can't even talk about it. We track the worst with Romany Webb from the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and reporter Bob Berwyn from Inside Climate …
Our host Eva is joined by Michael Burger, Executive Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and a Senior Research Scholar and Lecturer-at-Law at Columbia Law School. He is a co-author of Urban Climate Law (Columbia U Press, 2023), and an editor or co-editor of Global Climate Change and U.S. Law (ABA Publishing, 2023); Combating Climate Change with Section 115 of the Clean Air Act: Law and Policy Rationales (Edward Elgar, 2020) and Climate Change, Public Health and the Law (Cambridge U Press, 2018). He is a regent and fellow at the American College of Environmental Lawyers, and a member of the Advisory Council at the Institute at Brown for Environment and Society and the Advisory Board of Urban Ocean Lab. He is also of counsel at the boutique environmental law firm Sher Edling LLP. Sabin Center for Climate Change Law website: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/New York City Climate Law Tracker: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/content/nyc-climate-law-trackerCLCPA Scoping Plan Tracker: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/Scoping-Plan-TrackerClimate Backtracker: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/content/climate-backtrackerClimate Attribution database: https://climateattribution.org/
Speaker: Arman Sarvarian, University of SurreyDate: Friday Lunchtime Lecture: Friday 31 January 2025Dr Arman Sarvarian will speak about his forthcoming monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice to be published by Oxford University Press in April. The product of seven years' labour of approximately 170,000 words, the work includes a foreword by Professor August Reinisch of the University of Vienna and International Law Commission. The following is the summary of Oxford University Press:'The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice provides a comprehensive, practical, and empirical overview of the topic, establishing State succession as a distinct field with a cohesive set of rules.From the secession of the United States of America in 1784 to that of South Sudan in 2011, the book digests and analyses State practice spanning more than two centuries. It is based on research into a wide and diverse range of case studies, including archival and previously unpublished data. Reconstructing the intellectual foundation of the field, the book offers a vision for its progressive development - one that is rooted in an interpretation of State practice that transcends the politics of the codification projects in the decolonization and desovietization eras.The book examines international law on State succession with respect to territorial rights and obligations, State property (including archives) and debt, treaties, international claims and responsibility, as well as nationality and private property (including concessions and investments). Its central focus is identifying the general rules of international law in order to guide States in the negotiation of succession agreements, the interpretation of ambiguous or incomplete provisions, and the regulation of succession in default of specific agreement.A highly relevant work, The Law of State Succession offers governments, judges, legal practitioners, and scholars an authoritative account of the current law. It enables negotiators to identify different legal paths within succession and assists adjudicators in interpreting provisions of succession agreements and regulating questions omitted from such agreements.' The book is available for pre-order at the OUP website.Dr Arman Sarvarian a public international lawyer in academia and private practice. A Reader in Public International Law at the University of Surrey, he regularly acts as legal adviser and counsel to States, companies and individuals. He is counsel to the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire in the pending Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change advisory proceedings of the International Court of Justice and counsel in two pending investor-State arbitrations. Since 2019, he has served as legal adviser to the Republic of Armenia at the Legal Committee of the UN General Assembly for the annual reports of the International Law Commission and International Court of Justice as well as multilateral negotiations on reform of investor-State arbitration in Working Group III of the UN Commission on International Trade Law. He served as judge ad hoc in the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 2020.A generalist of broad interests and expertise, his first monograph Professional Ethics at the International Bar (Oxford University Press, International Courts and Tribunals Series, 19 September 2013) was the first comprehensive work on the subject and has been widely cited, including in proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, investment arbitrations and the International Court of Justice. His second monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice will be published by Oxford University Press in April 2025. He is a Humboldt Research Fellow in Climate Change Law at the University of Kiel from 2024 to 2026. Chair: Dr Jamie Trinidad, Centre Fellow
Speaker: Arman Sarvarian, University of SurreyDate: Friday Lunchtime Lecture: Friday 31 January 2025Dr Arman Sarvarian will speak about his forthcoming monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice to be published by Oxford University Press in April. The product of seven years' labour of approximately 170,000 words, the work includes a foreword by Professor August Reinisch of the University of Vienna and International Law Commission. The following is the summary of Oxford University Press:'The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice provides a comprehensive, practical, and empirical overview of the topic, establishing State succession as a distinct field with a cohesive set of rules.From the secession of the United States of America in 1784 to that of South Sudan in 2011, the book digests and analyses State practice spanning more than two centuries. It is based on research into a wide and diverse range of case studies, including archival and previously unpublished data. Reconstructing the intellectual foundation of the field, the book offers a vision for its progressive development - one that is rooted in an interpretation of State practice that transcends the politics of the codification projects in the decolonization and desovietization eras.The book examines international law on State succession with respect to territorial rights and obligations, State property (including archives) and debt, treaties, international claims and responsibility, as well as nationality and private property (including concessions and investments). Its central focus is identifying the general rules of international law in order to guide States in the negotiation of succession agreements, the interpretation of ambiguous or incomplete provisions, and the regulation of succession in default of specific agreement.A highly relevant work, The Law of State Succession offers governments, judges, legal practitioners, and scholars an authoritative account of the current law. It enables negotiators to identify different legal paths within succession and assists adjudicators in interpreting provisions of succession agreements and regulating questions omitted from such agreements.' The book is available for pre-order at the OUP website.Dr Arman Sarvarian a public international lawyer in academia and private practice. A Reader in Public International Law at the University of Surrey, he regularly acts as legal adviser and counsel to States, companies and individuals. He is counsel to the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire in the pending Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change advisory proceedings of the International Court of Justice and counsel in two pending investor-State arbitrations. Since 2019, he has served as legal adviser to the Republic of Armenia at the Legal Committee of the UN General Assembly for the annual reports of the International Law Commission and International Court of Justice as well as multilateral negotiations on reform of investor-State arbitration in Working Group III of the UN Commission on International Trade Law. He served as judge ad hoc in the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 2020.A generalist of broad interests and expertise, his first monograph Professional Ethics at the International Bar (Oxford University Press, International Courts and Tribunals Series, 19 September 2013) was the first comprehensive work on the subject and has been widely cited, including in proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, investment arbitrations and the International Court of Justice. His second monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice will be published by Oxford University Press in April 2025. He is a Humboldt Research Fellow in Climate Change Law at the University of Kiel from 2024 to 2026. Chair: Dr Jamie Trinidad, Centre Fellow
Speaker: Arman Sarvarian, University of SurreyDate: Friday Lunchtime Lecture: Friday 31 January 2025Dr Arman Sarvarian will speak about his forthcoming monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice to be published by Oxford University Press in April. The product of seven years' labour of approximately 170,000 words, the work includes a foreword by Professor August Reinisch of the University of Vienna and International Law Commission. The following is the summary of Oxford University Press:'The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice provides a comprehensive, practical, and empirical overview of the topic, establishing State succession as a distinct field with a cohesive set of rules.From the secession of the United States of America in 1784 to that of South Sudan in 2011, the book digests and analyses State practice spanning more than two centuries. It is based on research into a wide and diverse range of case studies, including archival and previously unpublished data. Reconstructing the intellectual foundation of the field, the book offers a vision for its progressive development - one that is rooted in an interpretation of State practice that transcends the politics of the codification projects in the decolonization and desovietization eras.The book examines international law on State succession with respect to territorial rights and obligations, State property (including archives) and debt, treaties, international claims and responsibility, as well as nationality and private property (including concessions and investments). Its central focus is identifying the general rules of international law in order to guide States in the negotiation of succession agreements, the interpretation of ambiguous or incomplete provisions, and the regulation of succession in default of specific agreement.A highly relevant work, The Law of State Succession offers governments, judges, legal practitioners, and scholars an authoritative account of the current law. It enables negotiators to identify different legal paths within succession and assists adjudicators in interpreting provisions of succession agreements and regulating questions omitted from such agreements.' The book is available for pre-order at the OUP website.Dr Arman Sarvarian a public international lawyer in academia and private practice. A Reader in Public International Law at the University of Surrey, he regularly acts as legal adviser and counsel to States, companies and individuals. He is counsel to the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire in the pending Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change advisory proceedings of the International Court of Justice and counsel in two pending investor-State arbitrations. Since 2019, he has served as legal adviser to the Republic of Armenia at the Legal Committee of the UN General Assembly for the annual reports of the International Law Commission and International Court of Justice as well as multilateral negotiations on reform of investor-State arbitration in Working Group III of the UN Commission on International Trade Law. He served as judge ad hoc in the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 2020.A generalist of broad interests and expertise, his first monograph Professional Ethics at the International Bar (Oxford University Press, International Courts and Tribunals Series, 19 September 2013) was the first comprehensive work on the subject and has been widely cited, including in proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, investment arbitrations and the International Court of Justice. His second monograph The Law of State Succession: Principles and Practice will be published by Oxford University Press in April 2025. He is a Humboldt Research Fellow in Climate Change Law at the University of Kiel from 2024 to 2026. Chair: Dr Jamie Trinidad, Centre Fellow
To begin my 14th year podcasting . . . , per the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Unversity, as of last September there were 1,850 climate crisis-related cases filed in the US challenging climate policy under constitutional, federal statutory including securities and financial regulations, state law claims and under several other categories. Law suits have been and will continued to be filed for the simple reason Congressional lawmaking and state legislating have failed to legitimately address the climate crisis, i.e., reduce CO2e emissions. Ms. Rodgers, Deputy Director, US Strategy at Our Children's Trust, a public interest law firm dedicated to securing children's legal rights to a healthy climate, discusses the current state of Juliana v the US initially filed in 2015, the 2023 Held v Montana decision in favor of 16 young people and a favorable 2024 settlement agreement resulting form Navahine F in which Hawaii's DOT agreed to move aggressively to achieve a net zero ground transporation system. Ms. Rodgers also discusses OCT's ongoing Genesis v the EPA case and the current International Court of Justice effort to reach an advisory opinion regarding climate-related legal obligations. Listeners may recall I interviewed Ms. Rodgers regarding Juliana in February 2020 and most recently, or last June, I spoke again with Michael Burger, CEO of Columbia's Sabin Center, regarding climate litigation generally. The Sabin Center's litigation database is at: https://climatecasechart.com/.Our Children's Trust is at: https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org/.Judge Josephine Staton's January 2020 dissent in Juliana is at: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/01/17/18-36082.pdf. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com
Are you allowed to throw alkaline minerals into the sea? Ashwin Murthy explains how to do Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement, without ending up in jail. Ashwin Murthy, Korey Silverman-Roati & Romany M. Webb, State Authority to Regulate Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School, December 2024 (2024). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/sabin_climate_change/237
In this Convo of Flanigan's Eco-Logic, Ted speaks with Professor Michael Gerrard from Columbia University. He is the founder and faculty director of the groundbreaking Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and one of the foremost environmental lawyers in the nation. Michael is an advocate, litigator, teacher, and scholar who has pioneered cutting-edge legal tools and strategies for addressing climate change. He writes and teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law, and energy regulation. He was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's renowned Earth Institute from 2015 to 2018 and now holds a joint appointment to the faculty of its successor, the Columbia Climate School.He and Ted discuss his background, growing up in Charleston, West Virginia in an immensely polluted area, which led to his interest in studying and protecting the environment. He moved to New York City to attend Columbia University, and has been there ever since. He started his career in journalism, later deciding to become an environmental lawyer, and then shifted to writing books and entered the world of academia. Before joining the Columbia Law School faculty in 2009, Michael practiced law in New York for three decades, most recently as the partner in charge of the New York office of Arnold & Porter. As an environmental lawyer, he tried numerous cases and argued many appeals in federal and state courts and administrative tribunals. He also handled the environmental aspects of diverse transactions and development projects and provided regulatory compliance advice to an array of clients in the private and public sectors. Several publications rated him the leading environmental lawyer in New York and one of the leaders in the world.He has also written or edited 14 books, including Global Climate Change and U.S. Law, the first and leading work in its field (co-edited with Jody Freeman and Michael Burger), and Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States (co-edited with John Dernbach). His 12-volume Environmental Law Practice Guide and four-volume Brownfields Law and Practice each received the Association of American Publishers' Best Law Book of the Year award.He highlights some of his most impressionable career cases, and shares that he is currently leading a legal effort to sue the Governor for New York, Kathy Hochul, for indefinitely pausing the rollout of congestion pricing in New York City. He also shares with Ted his work with the government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands on the legal issues caused by rising sea levels that threaten the island nation.
On June 28, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a 40-year precedent established in the landmark 1984 case, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council. The precedent, commonly referred to as the “Chevron Doctrine,” gave federal agencies considerable discretion to interpret laws passed by Congress when implementing regulations and policy. But with the court's new ruling, federal agencies no longer have the final say on how laws are interpreted. Instead, the judiciary will hold that power. So, how will the new ruling impact energy policy and environmental regulation? What are both proponents and opponents saying about the court's decision? And what does this mean more broadly for the modern administrative state? This week host Bill Loveless talks with Michael Gerrard and Jeff Holmstead about the implications of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Chevron Doctrine. Michael is the founder and faculty director of Columbia's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. From 2012 to 2018, he was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's Earth Institute. Before joining Columbia in 2009, Michael practiced environmental law in New York for three decades. Jeff is a partner and co-chair of the Environmental Strategies Group at Bracewell LLP. From 2001 to 2005, he served as the assistant administrator for air and radiation in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Matthew B.Eisenson (pictured) from the Columbia Climate School Sabin Centre for Climate Change Law was the guest on a recent webinar where he talked about the "Myths and Misinformation about Renewable Energy". A recording from the session will be posted soon on the Columbia Climate School YouTube site, please check back there. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robert-mclean/message
Mr. Burger joins me to discuss climate crisis-related litigation here and abroad and its effectiveness in curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Dedicated listeners may recall I interviewed Mr. Burger in May 2020 regarding the Trump administration's unwinding of numerous environmental regulations. Michael Burger is the Executive Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. Prior to, he was an associate professor at Roger Williams University School of Law and served as an attorney in the Environmental Law Division of New York City's Office of the Corporation Counsel. He is a co-founder and member of the Environmental Law Collaborative, the incoming chair of the New York City Bar Association International Environmental Law Committee and is a widely-published scholar, a frequent speaker at conferences and symposiums and a regular source for media outlets. Mr. Burger graduated from Columbia Law School, Brown University and holds a MFA from NYU.Per my noting Sabin provides a monthly climate litigation update, their June report is at: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/news/june-2024-updates-climate-case-charts. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com
G+T alumna Romany Webb joins us from the Sabin Centre for Climate Change Law at Columbia University to talk about regulatory approaches to carbon dioxide reduction and removal on the critical path to net zero and beyond. Plus rethinking no-poach and non-compete agreements and competition law, more greenwashing action from ASIC and the ACCC, sky-high penalties for Qantas while Bonza is grounded, things get complicated at the Supermarket Prices Inquiry, and the history of Monopoly from Lizzie Magie to Barbie™. All this and more with co-hosts Moya Dodd and Matt Rubinstein. The British Library on Lizzie Magie and the history of monopoly Suki's pink Honda S2000 at the Petersen Automotive Museum Treasury Consultation on Worker Non-Compete Clauses and Other Restraints and Assistant Minister Leigh's speech G+T on the ACCC's action on Glad bags and ocean plastics The Senate Greenwashing Inquiry hearings and ASIC Chair Joe Longo's speech on greenwashing and greenhushing G+T on the Qantas settlement with the ACCC The Senate Supermarket Prices Inquiry Final Report and MLex on its implications for merger reform AFR on the PE firm behind Bonza Meet the Gilbert + Tobin Competition, Consumer + Market Regulation team Email us at edge@gtlaw.com.au See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
This Day in Legal History: Constitutional Convention AssemblesOn May 14, 1787, a pivotal moment unfolded in American history as delegates from each state began to gather in Philadelphia for what would be known as the Constitutional Convention. This assembly was critical in shaping the nation's future, aimed at addressing the deficiencies of the Articles of Confederation—the loose framework that initially bound the states together after independence.As the delegates arrived, the stakes were incredibly high. The existing government structure under the Articles was proving inadequate in managing various critical issues, such as interstate disputes and financial instability. The Philadelphia meeting was convened to create a more robust federal government while ensuring that individual liberties were not infringed upon.Notably, every state except Rhode Island sent representatives to the Convention. Among the attendees were some of the most distinguished figures of the era, including George Washington, who was unanimously elected as the president of the convention, and James Madison, now considered the "Father of the Constitution" due to his pivotal role in drafting the document.The convention sessions were held in strict secrecy, a decision made to foster open debate and prevent external influences. The result of the intense deliberations, which continued until September 17, was the creation of a new Constitution. This document established a stronger federal government with separate executive, legislative, and judicial branches, fundamentally changing the direction of the United States.The ratification process that followed was another intense debate, reflective of the diverse viewpoints within the states about the balance of power between state and federal authorities. The Federalist Papers, written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, played a crucial role in persuading the public and state legislatures to adopt the new Constitution.Today, the Constitution remains a living document, central to American law and governance, illustrating the enduring legacy of the decisions made during those historic months in Philadelphia. The events of May 14, 1787, mark not just the beginning of the Constitutional Convention but also the starting point of a constitutional democracy that would influence governance structures worldwide.Perkins Coie, a Seattle-founded law firm, is expanding its global footprint by launching a new office in London. The London office will be led by Ian Bagshaw, former co-head of White & Case's global private equity practice, who joined Perkins Coie after leaving Big Law to chair a startup. Joining him are three other former White & Case lawyers, including Jan Andrusko, who will serve as the European head of M&A for Perkins Coie.The London office aims to tap into the local and European markets for venture capital, private equity, and startups, leveraging the firm's established tech-sector expertise in the U.S. Perkins Coie plans to offer a comprehensive range of services through this single European hub, focusing on privacy, technology transactions, and M&A, without pursuing a network of offices across Europe.This strategic move marks Perkins Coie's first establishment outside of the U.S. and Asia. In 2021, the firm ranked 43rd largest in the U.S. by revenue, with earnings of $1.2 billion. The London office will initially feature a corporate group but may expand to include intellectual property and litigation services to provide a more rounded offering to tech-focused corporate clients.Ian Bagshaw, along with partners Jan Stejskal, Craig Fagan, and Barry O'Driscoll, and senior counsel Jan Jakoubek, are part of the founding team. They bring significant experience in private equity, cross-border M&A, and corporate law, aiming to recreate the startup culture prevalent in the U.S. within the European context. Bagshaw highlighted the startup-like environment of the new office and his motivation to build a new business with a clear strategic direction as key factors in his move to Perkins Coie.The focus on privacy and technology transactions in the new office is significant. These areas are crucial in the tech sector, involving the handling of sensitive data and the execution of tech-related deals, which are key growth areas in European legal markets. This strategic choice underlines Perkins Coie's intent to leverage their U.S. strengths in a new market, reflecting broader trends in global law practice where specialization aligns with industry needs.Perkins Coie Launches London Office, Eyeing Start-Up Tech MarketJury selection for U.S. Senator Robert Menendez's corruption trial resumed on May 14, 2024, in Manhattan federal court, with charges stemming from an alleged bribery scheme involving foreign governments. Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat, has denied wrongdoing, pleading not guilty to 16 charges, including bribery, fraud, acting as a foreign agent, and obstruction. The trial also involves two New Jersey businessmen, Wael Hana and Fred Daibes, and Menendez's wife, Nadine, who will be tried separately due to medical reasons.The accusations detail that Senator Menendez accepted substantial bribes, including cash, gold bars, and a luxury car, in return for political favors to the governments of Egypt and Qatar. The FBI discovered much of the cash hidden at the Menendezes' home. Menendez allegedly facilitated arms deals for Egypt and attempted to secure a monopoly for Hana on halal meat certifications to Egypt. He is also charged with attempting to influence a Qatari investment fund on behalf of Daibes and interfering in a criminal case against him.Despite the severity of these charges, Menendez has not resigned but has stepped down from his role as the leader of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. His previous legal troubles in 2017, involving a wealthy Florida ophthalmologist, ended in a mistrial. As the current trial unfolds, Menendez faces significant public disapproval in New Jersey, complicating any potential reelection efforts. His wife's trial is scheduled for July 8, where health concerns will play a central role, and Menendez might shift blame to her as part of his defense strategy.Jury selection to resume in US Senator Menendez's corruption trial | ReutersThe Delaware Supreme Court is set to hear an appeal concerning a substantial attorney fee award in a lawsuit involving Dell Technologies Inc. and a $1 billion stockholder settlement over a stock conversion, which was allegedly coerced by Michael Dell and Silver Lake LLC in 2018. This case, which is notable for its rare nine-figure fee award, reflects a broader discussion in Delaware about how much plaintiffs' attorneys should be compensated in significant legal settlements.In this particular case, attorneys who facilitated the historic settlement were awarded $267 million, which represents the second-highest fee ever awarded in the state's Chancery Court history. This award is currently being challenged by Pentwater Capital Management LP, which argues that the 27% fee is excessively generous and constitutes a windfall.The appeal comes at a time when Delaware's courts are also considering other large fee requests, including two involving Tesla Inc., where one case seeks a $230 million fee for a settlement concerning board compensation, and another involves an investor challenging CEO Elon Musk's pay package.The Delaware courts have historically used a multi-factor test to determine the fairness of legal fees, which considers the complexity of the case, the attorneys' skill and experience, and the risk of contingency. The debate over these fees has even drawn input from law professors, with some advocating for a declining-percentage method used in federal courts, which reduces the percentage fee as the settlement amount increases.This ongoing legal debate highlights the evolving challenges and considerations in determining reasonable compensation for legal services in major corporate litigation, especially in a state known for its significant corporate law cases.Dell Fee Request at Delaware High Court Could Impact Tesla SuitsThe legal battle involving 21 young plaintiffs in a significant U.S. climate lawsuit has reached a precarious point following a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The court granted a February request from the Justice Department to dismiss the case, known as Juliana v. US, directing Judge Ann Aiken of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon to terminate it. This lawsuit, aiming for government accountability on climate action, has seen setbacks before, including a 2020 dismissal where the plaintiffs' demands for more aggressive government intervention against global warming were deemed beyond judicial capability to grant.The plaintiffs, represented by Our Children's Trust, are now considering limited options, such as requesting a full panel rehearing at the Ninth Circuit or potentially escalating the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, legal experts, including Michael Gerrard of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, caution against the latter due to the Supreme Court's current composition, which may not be favorable towards climate-related cases.The recent ruling underscores judicial hesitancy to engage in what is seen as policy-making—a realm typically reserved for the legislative branch. Despite this, the plaintiffs' lawyer, Julia Olson, argues that a court declaration recognizing the unconstitutional nature of current government practices could be transformative, similar to past court interventions that advanced justice and equality. Yet, the feasibility of such outcomes appears increasingly doubtful under prevailing legal standards and judicial perspectives.With these challenges, some suggest that initiating a new lawsuit with updated claims might offer a more straightforward route, given the ongoing and emerging government failures in addressing climate change since the initial 2015 filing. This strategy could potentially bypass previous legal obstacles, presenting fresh grounds for legal arguments based on more recent developments in climate policy and its failures.Youth Climate Lawsuit Faces Dire Path After Ninth Circuit RulingJack Teixeira, a 22-year-old member of the Massachusetts Air National Guard, is facing further legal challenges after already pleading guilty to serious national security breaches involving the leak of classified documents. Teixeira, who had been arrested in April 2023, admitted to charges related to leaking sensitive information on military operations, including details about the war in Ukraine, under a deal with the U.S. Department of Justice that proposed a minimum of 11 years in prison. Despite this civilian court case, the Air Force has opted to pursue additional military charges against him, which could lead to another 10 and a half years in prison if he is convicted.These military charges include obstructing justice and failing to obey a lawful order, with a hearing set to take place at Hanscom Air Force Base in Massachusetts to assess whether the evidence is substantial enough to proceed to a court-martial. Teixeira, who worked as a cyber defense operations journeyman with top-secret security clearance, reportedly shared classified information on various international issues through a messaging app, impacting U.S. and global security interests. His sentencing for the civilian charges is scheduled for September 27.Pentagon leaker Jack Teixeira faces US military justice hearing | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
The US Securities and Exchange Commission on March 6 finalized a long-awaited rule requiring thousands of publicly traded companies to disclose certain climate-related information. The final rule takes a narrower approach than what the SEC proposed in 2022; it also marks a significant change in the level of climate-related information that publicly listed companies must disclose in the US. In this episode of the ESG Insider podcast, we explore key components of the SEC rule and its implications for investors and companies — as well as how it fits in the broader global climate disclosure landscape. We talk with Cynthia Hanawalt, a Director at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, a think tank at Columbia Law School; she gives us an overview of the rule's requirements. We speak to Bruno Sarda from professional services company EY, where he focuses on climate change and sustainability services. Bruno says a key message from the rule is that “climate risk is financial risk ... companies need to be ready to both measure, manage and communicate that risk." We hear from Kristina Wyatt, Deputy General Counsel and Chief Sustainability Officer at carbon accounting software company Persefoni, about how the rule fits into the broader global disclosure landscape. And to understand what's on the horizon for the rule, we hear from Elizabeth Dawson, a Partner at law firm Crowell & Moring where she is a leader on the ESG advisory team and Chair of the Sustainability Committee. Read research from S&P Global Sustainable1 about the current US landscape for corporate climate disclosure: https://www.spglobal.com/esg/insights/featured/special-editorial/after-sec-rulemaking-assessing-the-us-climate-disclosure-landscape Listen to the podcast episode we released when the SEC proposed its climate disclosure rule in 2022: https://www.spglobal.com/esg/podcasts/unpacking-implications-of-the-sec-s-proposed-climate-disclosure-rule This piece was published by S&P Global Sustainable1, a part of S&P Global. Copyright ©2024 by S&P Global DISCLAIMER By accessing this Podcast, I acknowledge that S&P GLOBAL makes no warranty, guarantee, or representation as to the accuracy or sufficiency of the information featured in this Podcast. The information, opinions, and recommendations presented in this Podcast are for general information only and any reliance on the information provided in this Podcast is done at your own risk. This Podcast should not be considered professional advice. Unless specifically stated otherwise, S&P GLOBAL does not endorse, approve, recommend, or certify any information, product, process, service, or organization presented or mentioned in this Podcast, and information from this Podcast should not be referenced in any way to imply such approval or endorsement. The third party materials or content of any third party site referenced in this Podcast do not necessarily reflect the opinions, standards or policies of S&P GLOBAL. S&P GLOBAL assumes no responsibility or liability for the accuracy or completeness of the content contained in third party materials or on third party sites referenced in this Podcast or the compliance with applicable laws of such materials and/or links referenced herein. Moreover, S&P GLOBAL makes no warranty that this Podcast, or the server that makes it available, is free of viruses, worms, or other elements or codes that manifest contaminating or destructive properties.
Law structures so much of our lives, but can feel inaccessible to those untrained. It is also in flux! How is the law being changed in response to climate change? Which laws can be adapted to suit our climate-changing country and world? And which are unprepared for new challenges? Today's episode of Carbon Removal Newsroom is hosted by Radhika Moolgavkar, Nori's VP of Supply and Methodology. She is joined by Romany Webb, the Deputy Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at the Columbia Law School. They discuss the evolving field of climate law, its critical role in the development of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies, and the unique legal challenges presented by ocean-based CDR methods. Webb highlights the growing interest among law students in climate technology and emphasizes the importance of legal frameworks in addressing climate change. The conversation delves into the complexities of international and local laws governing oceans, the innovative concept of Community Benefits Agreements for climate projects, and the positive feedback on model law proposals intended to regulate CDR activities safely. The episode underscores the necessity of a diverse portfolio of CDR solutions to combat the climate crisis and explores the legal opportunities and challenges facing the CDR industry's advancement. On This Episode Radhika Moolgavkar Romany Webb Resources Sabin Center for Change Law at the Columbia Law School Connect with Nori Nori Nori's X account Nori's other podcast Reversing Climate Change Nori's CDR meme X account --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/carbonremovalnewsroom/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/carbonremovalnewsroom/support
Ohio, Indiana, and West Virginia have challenged the Environmental Protection Agency's “Good Neighbor” rule in the Supreme Court. The regulation is designed to keep one state's ozone emissions from spilling downwind and pushing another state out of compliance. Michael Burger from the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University explores what this challenge means for the environmental regulation landscape. Also, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has announced new measures to reduce the allowable amount of fine particulate pollution in the air. Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy discusses these new standards, as well as the Inflation Reduction Act and the role of women in the environmental movement. To kick off Women's History Month, we dive into the legacy of women outdoors in America. From abolitionist Harriet Tubman to novelist Louisa May Alcott, some of the country's most important women trailblazers shared a connection with the natural world in their girlhood. Tiya Miles shares their stories in her book Wild Girls: How the Outdoors Shaped the Women Who Challenged a Nation. -- We rely on support from listeners like you to keep our journalism strong. You can donate at loe.org – any amount is appreciated! -- and thank you for your support. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
A study published in 2021 found that 59 per cent of 10,000 young adults surveyed are extremely worried about climate change, with many experiencing negative effects on their daily lives. This phenomenon, termed "climate anxiety", is characterised by feelings of helplessness and fear due to the perceived enormity and complexity of climate change issues. In conjunction with IPS' annual flagship conference, Singapore Perspectives 2024, themed around the topic of youths, the sixth episode of the "IPS On Diversity" Season 4, delves into the psychological and emotional impact of climate change on young people. Host Liang Kaixin is joined by Melissa Low, a research fellow at the National University of Singapore's (NUS) Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions, and Darren Quek, Principal of Forest School Singapore and a climate activist. Melissa and Darren discuss their personal experiences with climate anxiety and the broader implications of this emotional state on society. The conversation touches upon the role of media in shaping perceptions of climate change and the potential impact of climate anxiety on future demographic trends, like decisions around starting a family. The discussion concludes with suggestions for addressing climate anxiety, including seeking mental health support, and engaging in community and grassroots activities. The episode provides insights into the emotional toll of environmental issues on younger generations and the need for mental health support in the face of climate change. Find out more about adulting and housing in Singapore: Straits Times (17 July 2023): Green Pulse Podcast: Climate change is a mental health issue Channel News Asia (30 March 2023): Commentary: Is ‘climate anxiety' a clinical diagnosis? Should it be? Asian Scientist (23 March 2023): The Climate Anxiety Issue About our guests: Melissa Low, Research Fellow, Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions, National University of Singapore Melissa Low is a Research Fellow at the National University of Singapore's (NUS) Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions. At the Centre, Melissa leads Continuing Education and Training. She previously worked at the Energy Studies Institute, NUS where she carried out research projects on a range of energy and climate issues of concern to Singapore and the region. She has participated in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of Parties (COP) for over a decade and is an active sustainability thought leader, authoring, publishing and presenting at various forums. She is the Designated Contact Point for NUS's accreditation to the UNFCCC and currently serves as interim co-focal point on the nine-member Steering Committee of the Research and Independent Non-Governmental Organisation (RINGO) Constituency under the UNFCCC. Melissa holds an LLM in Climate Change Law and Policy (with distinction) from the University of Strathclyde, MSc in Environmental Management and BSocSci (Hons) in Geography from NUS. For her Master's thesis on past and contemporary proposals on equity and differentiation in shaping the 2015 climate agreement, Melissa was awarded the Shell Best Dissertation Award 2013. She is currently pursuing a PhD part-time at the NUS Department of Geography. Outside of work, Melissa started an eco-friendly/ social book swop movement in Singapore, called Books and Beer, which has been featured in The Straits Times, The Business Times, Bangkok Post and The Wall Street Journal's Scene Asia Blog. Darren Quek, Principal, Forest School Singapore Darren is the Principal of Forest School Singapore (FSS). He has spent 15 years in the field of Education, starting from a simple Assistant Trainer for Robotics and Game Programming, till where he is now, a Principal for FSS and Trail Blazer for Forest School Education in Singapore. He started the first Forest School in Singapore in 2016, after learning from and understudying from his Mentor Atsuko sensei, a Forest Kindergarten practitioner and parent in Japan. He also earned his Forest School Level 3 Practitioner Certification through time spent in Manchester and Sheffield undergoing training and assessments. More from On Diversity Season 4 Episode 5: Youth and Caregiving with Tan Poh Lin, Senior Research Fellow at IPS and Jason Leow Season 4 Episode 4: Home Alone and Adulting with Chew Han Ei, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow at IPS and Klinsen Soh Season 4 Episode 3: Hustle Culture and Quiet Quitting with Laurel Teo, Senior Research Fellow at IPS and He Ruiming, Founder of The Woke Salaryman Season 4 Episode 2: Destigmatising HIV and AIDS with Rayner Tan, Assistant Professor of NUS and Terry Lim, Associate Director of Action for AIDS Season 4 Episode 1: The Dual Challenges of Poverty and Single Motherhood with Carrie Tan, MP, Founder of Daughters of Tomorrow and Elizabeth Quek, Programme Manager at AWARE Season 3 Episode 9: Being Biracial in Singapore with Shane Pereira, Research Associate at IPS and Dave Parkash, Co-Founder at Fook Kin Restaurant Season 3 Episode 8: Pregnancy and Maternity Discrimination with Sher-li Torrey, Founder of Mums@Work and Kalpana Vignehsa, Senior Research Fellow at IPS Season 3 Episode 7: Palliative Care for the Young and Old with Dr Chong Poh Heng, Medical Director at HCA Hospice Limited and Tay Jia Ying, an end-of-life doula and Founder of Happy Ever After See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Around the world, activists are turning to the courts to hold major polluters accountable for climate change. This recently played out in the United States. Young plaintiffs in Montana successfully presented scientific evidence that connects the states' greenhouse gas emissions to environmental harm. Many legal experts say the case, Montana v. Held, is another major development for climate litigation. Other cases playing out across the globe show the courts could be a way to reduce CO2 emissions in the private sector. So, what are some of the other major legal cases aimed at fighting climate change? And how could they impact the push to reduce global emissions? This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Michael Gerrard about current trends in global climate change litigation, including the expanding range of legal theories that are being applied. Michael is the founder and faculty director of Columbia's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, where he writes and teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law, and energy regulation. He was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's Earth Institute from 2015 to 2018. Before joining Columbia in 2009, Michael practiced environmental law in New York for three decades. The Sabin Center maintains a database that tracks climate change litigation around the world. As of December 31, 2022, the database included 2,180 cases. In addition, the Sabin Center and the UN Environment Program recently issued the 2023 “Global Climate Litigation Report,” which takes into account information from that database.
Last week, a judge in Montana ruled that the state has to take into account climate change mitigation when it weighs future fossil fuel projects. Samantha Maldonado, reporter at The City covering climate and resiliency, and Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, discuss what this could mean for New York State, where voters passed a green amendment back in 2021. → What the Landmark Climate Ruling in Montana Means for New York
Welcome to my new Series "Can you talk real quick?" This is a short, efficiently produced conversation with an expert who will let me record a quick chat to help us all better understand an issue in the news or our lives as well as connect with each other around something that might be unfolding in real time. Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls NPR: "A Montana judge on Monday sided with young environmental activists who said state agencies were violating their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment by permitting fossil fuel development without considering its effect on the climate. The ruling following a first-of-its- kind trial in the U.S. adds to a small number of legal decisions around the world that have established a government duty to protect citizens from climate change. District Court Judge Kathy Seeley found the policy the state uses in evaluating requests for fossil fuel permits — which does not allow agencies to evaluate the effects of greenhouse gas emissions — is unconstitutional." I reached out to the founder and faculty director of the groundbreaking Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and one of the foremost environmental lawyers in the nation, Michael Gerrard is an advocate, litigator, teacher, and scholar who has pioneered cutting-edge legal tools and strategies for addressing climate change. He writes and teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law, and energy regulation. He was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's renowned Earth Institute from 2015 to 2018. For three decades, before joining the Columbia Law School faculty in 2009, Gerrard practiced law in New York, most recently as the partner in charge of the New York office of Arnold & Porter, where he remains senior counsel. As an environmental lawyer, he tried numerous cases and argued many appeals in federal and state courts and administrative tribunals. He also handled the environmental aspects of diverse transactions and development projects and provided regulatory compliance advice to an array of clients in the private and public sectors. Several publications rated him the leading environmental lawyer in New York and one of the leaders in the world. A prolific author, he has written or edited 14 books, including Global Climate Change and U.S. Law, the first and leading work in its field (co-edited with Jody Freeman and Michael Burger), and Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States (co-edited with John Dernbach). His 12-volume Environmental Law Practice Guide and four-volume Brownfields Law and Practice each received the Association of American Publishers' Best Law Book of the Year award. Gerrard is the former chair of the American Bar Association's 10,000-member Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources. He has also chaired the New York City Bar Association's Executive Committee and the New York State Bar Association's environmental law section. He has served on the executive committees of the boards of the Environmental Law Institute and the American College of Environmental Lawyers. Gerrard also has taught courses at Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, and the University of Malta. He has lectured on environmental law in Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, France, Great Britain, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malta, the Marshall Islands, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Vatican City, and throughout the United States. He has worked with the government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands on the legal issues caused by rising sea levels that threaten the island nation. Follow Professor Gerrard on Twitter Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll Follow and Support Pete Coe
Ketidakadilan iklim terjadi di mana-mana, masyarakat rentan paling jadi korban. Yuk, berkenalan dengan litigasi iklim! Ini adalah salah satu cara yang bisa kita tempuh untuk memperjuangkan keadilan iklim. Belakangan ini, makin banyak pejuang lingkungan hidup, masyarakat adat, dan komunitas lainnya yang menempuh gugatan litigasi iklim. Laporan terbaru yang dirilis UN Environment Programme (UNEP) bersama Sabin Center for Climate Change Law mencatat hingga akhir 2022, terdapat 2.180 gugatan hukum terkait dengan krisis iklim di seluruh dunia.
In this episode of Flanigan's Eco-Logic, Ted speaks with William Boyd, Michael J. Klein Chair, Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law, and Professor at UCLA's Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. He is also a Faculty Co-Director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, and Project Lead for the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force (GCF).William and Ted discuss his background, growing up in South Carolina. He received his B.A. from University of North Carolina, his M.A. and Ph.D. from UC Berkeley's Energy and Resources Group, and his J.D. from Stanford Law School. He then moved to Washington D.C. and worked for the World Resources Institute, and was previously a Professor of Law and a John H. Schultz Energy Law Fellow at University of Colorado Boulder School of Law. His primary research and teaching interests are in energy law and regulation, climate change law and policy, and environmental law. He continues to be actively involved in climate, energy, and environmental policy matters at multiple levels of governance. Since 2009, he has served as the Project Lead for the Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force (GCF), a unique subnational collaboration of 38 states and provinces from Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Spain, and the United States that is working to develop regulatory frameworks to reduce emissions from deforestation and land use. Boyd is also the founding Director of the Laboratory for Energy & Environmental Policy innovation (LEEP), a policy innovation lab based in Boulder, Colorado that works with partners around the world to develop and support real-time policy experiments, establish robust networks for learning and exchange, and contribute to effective and durable policy outcomes.
Climate-related court cases around the world are growing fast, and on Thursday the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) together with the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, highlighted the trend in their new Global Climate Litigation Report. Andrew Raine, Head of the Frontiers in Environmental Law Unit of UNEP, spoke to UN News's Anton Uspensky about the report's findings, which show cases are surging in the Global South with human rights emerging as a powerful driver behind climate litigation.
The Bar at Law podcast is hosted by Barrister Sarah Kazmi. It introduces lawyers and law students in Pakistan to various practice areas and aspects of the legal profession. To start the second season, Barrister William Wilson joins as a guest on the show to talk about the practice of climate change law. William is a director of Wyeside Consulting Ltd providing legal services in the area of environment, energy and climate law, public policy and regulation in the UK and internationally. He is also the founder of cop26andbeyond.comFor comments and feedback on the episode, please email sarah@erm.com.pkResources recommended by William:IPPC ReportsIPBES Biodiversity reports Litigation – Sabin Centre for Climate Change Law, Columbia University -Grantham Institute – Climate Change and the EnvironmentTipping Points – Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research –CO2 levels – Mauna Loa Observatory – NOAA, Scripps Oceanographic Institution- (June 2023 – 423.68 ppm)Law Society for England and Wales: Climate hub, and Climate change guidance for Solicitors -Climate Resilient Architecture – 2023 RIBA Gold Medal winner, Yasmeen Lari –COP26 and beyond Newsletter Milieudefensie et al v Royal Dutch Shell case –Saul Luciano Lliuya v RWE case
The last several years have seen a big increase in the number of lawsuits focused on the climate crisis. Some lawsuits challenge governments for their support for fossil fuels and for their failure to take climate action, while other cases target the fossil fuel companies themselves for knowingly misleading the world about the climate disrupting impacts of burning their products. Some of these cases seek monetary damages, others seek to hold governments accountable to their emissions reduction pledges. As more of these cases get their time in court, how powerful can litigation be in forcing action around the climate emergency? Guests: Delta Merner, Lead Scientist, Science Hub for Climate Litigation, Union of Concerned Scientists Korey Silverman-Roati, Senior Fellow, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School Lucy Maxwell, Co-Director, Climate Litigation Network, Urgenda Foundation For show notes and related links, visit https://www.climateone.org/watch-and-listen/podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The last several years have seen a big increase in the number of lawsuits focused on the climate crisis. Some lawsuits challenge governments for their support for fossil fuels and for their failure to take climate action, while other cases target the fossil fuel companies themselves for knowingly misleading the world about the climate disrupting impacts of burning their products. Some of these cases seek monetary damages, others seek to hold governments accountable to their emissions reduction pledges. As more of these cases get their time in court, how powerful can litigation be in forcing action around the climate emergency? Guests: Delta Merner, Lead Scientist, Science Hub for Climate Litigation, Union of Concerned Scientists Korey Silverman-Roati, Senior Fellow, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School Lucy Maxwell, Co-Director, Climate Litigation Network, Urgenda Foundation For show notes and related links, visit https://www.climateone.org/watch-and-listen/podcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
On Monday, 16 young plaintiffs—between the ages of 5 and 22—walked into a packed courtroom in Helena, Montana, to sue their government. At issue is a 1972 amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing that the “state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations.” 22-year-old Rikki Held and her co-plaintiffs allege that state officials violated that constitutional right. The case, Held v. Montana, now over a decade in the making, is truly historic—the first-ever constitutional climate lawsuit to reach trial in the United States.Lawfare Managing Editor Tyler McBrien sat down with Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at the Columbia Law School to talk through what's at stake in this landmark case. They discussed the origins of the trial, its potential ripple effects, and where Held v. Montana sits in the landscape of climate change litigation around the world. Other reading of interest:This climate newsletter from Annie Crabill at The EconomistSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
The US isn't delivering on its pledges to reverse climate change. The Willow Project in Alaska, labelled by some as a “carbon bomb”, is a key example of that. But with global energy supply chains so massively disrupted by the war in Ukraine, are these kinds of projects justified? Michael Gerrard is the founder of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School. He joined Arthur Snell in the Bunker to discuss why pushing through new climate laws is so difficult. “We ARE NOT on the trajectory that we want to be.” – Michael Gerrard “The US climate commitments are not really legally binding.” – Michael Gerrard “The Supreme Court has become somewhat of an impediment.” – Michael Gerrard. “In the US there have been efforts going back to 2004 to hold oil and gas responsible for climate change.” – Michael Gerrard. www.patreon.com/bunkercast Written and presented by Arthur Snell Producer: Chris Jones. Audio production: Simon Williams. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Managing Editor: Jacob Jarvis. Music by Kenny Dickinson THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production Instagram | Twitter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Michael Burger, executive director of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, talks about the latest proposals from the Biden administration that would cap carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants to virtually eliminate them by 2040.
Collège de FranceLaurence Boisson de ChazournesAvenir Commun Durable (2022-2023)Colloque - Le droit international de l'environnement face au défi de l'effectivitéSession 2 – Protection de l'environnement et droits de la personne humaine : quelle(s) alliance(s) ?Realizing Environmental Protection through Indigenous Laws: Lessons for International Environmental Law from the Canadian ExperienceRésuméInternational environmental law has long recognized the importance of ensuring that Indigenous peoples play an active role in environmental management. The 2022 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework explicitly acknowledges Indigenous peoples as custodians and partners in biodiversity conservation as well as restoration and sustainable use, and that the rights, values and knowledge of Indigenous peoples must be respected. In settler colonial states such as Canada, respect for the rights of Indigenous peoples is essential and intertwined with environment law. While Canada initially voted against the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), the federal government has since endorsed it and is actively seeking to implement UNDRIP as a response to the 2015 Calls to Action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). The TRC Calls to Action point to the need to educate lawyers about UNDRIP, Aboriginal law (s35 of the 1982 Constitution Act and judicial decisions) and Indigenous law (law emanating from the legal orders of individual Indigenous nations). Respect for Indigenous law in Canada informs the establishment of terrestrial and marine Indigenous protected and conserved areas, and the assessment of cumulative effects in resource development. It also has profound implications for international environmental law.Sara SeckAssociate Professor Sara L. Seck is the Yogis & Keddy Chair in Human Rights Law at the Schulich School of Law and Marine & Environmental Law Institute, Dalhousie University in Canada. An active member of the International Law Association (ILA), she participated in the drafting of the white paper on International Law in the Anthropocene (2022). Recent research contributions include as coeditor of the Research Handbook on Climate Change Law and Loss & Damage (2021), co-editor of the Cambridge Handbook of Environmental Justice and Sustainable Development (2021) and, from Volume 36, co-editor of the Ocean Yearbook.
Changing climate brings new risks to infrastructure, and commonly these risks are shared with insurance companies. To control their risks, insurers need to understand and anticipate both the sources and characteristics of natural threats, and to collaborate with their clients – infrastructure owners and operators – to mitigate the risks of natural hazards. To open a window on the role of insurers in addressing climate risk, we talk with Martin Lockman, a research lawyer working at Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Martin works at the intersection of climate-related threats to infrastructure, the insurance industry, and risk management.
Episode 57 - Tiffany takes us on a journey around the world from Colombia to France to the U.S. and back again. She tells us about her adoption, growing up bilingual in France, what it was like going to an international school, how she met her husband, and how they are raising their two children multilingually. So much wisdom in this episode! Tiffany works as a communications associate at The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law so I am delighted to have this episode come out on Earth Day 2023! I love Tiffany's message that we don't have to chose which parts of our identities to embrace, we can embrace them all and celebrate our rich cultural and linguistic diversity. To find out more about Tiffany, check out her blog MamanEarth and follow her on Instagram @Maman_Earth. You can find Heather on Instagram @thefutureisbilingual, on her website or by writing to her at TFIBPodcast@gmail.com. If you enjoy this podcast, please let a rating on your favorite podcast app and a review here. You can also buy a coffee to help support the show :) --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/the-future-is-bilingual/support
Healthcare attorney Harry Nelson of Nelson Hardiman, discusses the first trial of Juul and Altria Group over the marketing of vaping products to young audiences.Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, discusses an upcoming trial where Montana kids are suing the state over climate change.June Grasso hosts.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Healthcare attorney Harry Nelson of Nelson Hardiman, discusses the first trial of Juul and Altria Group over the marketing of vaping products to young audiences.Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, discusses an upcoming trial where Montana kids are suing the state over climate change.June Grasso hosts.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
People displaced by climate change are not eligible for refugee status. But should countries extend any sort of legal protections to them? Our guest, Ama Francis, a climate displacement project strategist with the International Refugee Assistance Project and Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, thinks so. In this episode, we discuss some small ongoing initiatives and what new legal pathways might look like.
People displaced by climate change are not eligible for refugee status. But should countries extend any sort of legal protections to them? Our guest, Ama Francis, a climate displacement project strategist with the International Refugee Assistance Project and Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, thinks so. In this episode, we discuss some small ongoing initiatives and what new legal pathways might look like.
Wil Burns speaks to Romany Webb, an Associate Research Scholar at Columbia Law School and Deputy Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, about local legislation around coastal and ocean carbon removal. Romany recently authored a paper entitled "Permitting seaweed cultivation for carbon sequestration in California: barriers and recommendations" and is on the podcast to discuss her experience with state and local legislation on the matter. Romany Webb: https://climate.law.columbia.edu/directory/romany-m-webb
Building codes: they might sound boring, but they're actually the front lines in a nationwide battle to decarbonize our buildings. And they do a lot more than keeping your home from falling down over your head. They regulate everything from energy efficiency, to the kind of fuel your stove runs on, to whether your building has an electric vehicle charging port – all super important facets of building decarbonization. And if designed correctly, building codes can also help address issues like public health, pollution, and even adaptation to the effects of climate change. In this episode, Melissa speaks with Michael Gerrard, an expert on environment and climate law and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University about how to unlock this secret weapon – and what's getting in the way of greener building codes. The Big Switch is produced by Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy in partnership with Post Script Media. This episode was produced by Alexandria Herr and Daniel Woldorff. Theme music and mixing by Sean Marquand. Story editing by Anne Bailey. A special thanks to Natalie Volk, Kirsten Smith and Kyu Lee. Our executive editor is Stephen Lacey.
In a 6-3 decision in West Virginia v. EPA, Supreme Court justices determined that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overstepped its authority in regulating carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Since the Thursday decision, several environmental groups have called the monumental ruling devastating to the Biden administration's efforts to facilitate a clean energy transition. For a breakdown of the decision and its implications for climate regulations moving forward, host Bill Loveless spoke with legal experts Michael Gerrard and Jeff Holmstead. Michael is founder and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. He has pioneered innovative legal strategies and teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law and energy regulation. Before his time at Columbia, Michael was the head of the New York law office of Arnold & Porter. Jeff heads the Environmental Strategies Group at the law firm Bracewell. He previously served as assistant administrator for air and radiation at the EPA under President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2005. During his tenure, he was one of the architects behind the Clean Air Interstate Rule, the Clean Air Diesel Rule and the Mercury Rule for power plants. The pair discussed precisely how the rule curbs the EPA's power, where it stops short, and the kind of legal precedence it sets for future cases.
The climate crisis threatens to create global food, health, housing, and social insecurity and displace millions, if not billions, of people. A major cause of rapid climate change is the dramatic increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the atmosphere driven by human activity over the last century. In fact, the past five years have been the five warmest years on record, and all signs point to a continuing trend unless massive steps are taken to slow down and reverse the tide. While there is no one-size-fits-all solution to fighting climate change, deep decarbonization, or achieving net-zero emissions, has emerged as the major goal for the next decades. What does deep decarbonization entail? Michael Gerrard, professor at Columbia Law School and the faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, explains the legal challenges and reforms needed in energy and transportation, the two largest GHG emitting sectors, to achieve deep decarbonization and the policies and actions the Biden administration will likely institute in the near-term to reach climate change objectives.
The Supreme Court is expected to release an opinion in the case West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency soon. Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, previews what the case is about and the implications for combating climate change, especially if the court rules against the EPA.
A forthcoming Supreme Court decision could hamper some of the EPA's authority to curtail carbon emissions. On Today's Show:Michael Gerrard, professor of law at Columbia Law School and the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, previews what the case is about and the implications for combating climate change, especially if the court rules against the EPA.
Maryland scores yet another climate change law, plus cranberry bog restoration in Tannersville, MD. Funding for Michigan's Erie Marsh, and a Denmark/USA partnership aims to reduce water sector CO2 emissions.
Entrevistado: Gabriel Wedy - Juiz Federal. Pós-Doutor, Doutor e Mestre em Direito Ambiental. Visiting Scholar pela Columbia Law School (Sabin Center for Climate Change Law) e pela Universität Heidelberg (Institut für deutsches und europäisches Verwaltungsrecht). Membro do Grupo de Trabalho “Observatório do Meio Ambiente e das Mudanças Climáticas” do Conselho Nacional de Justiça (CNJ). Professor nos programas de Pós-Graduação e na Escola de Direito da Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (Unisinos). Professor na Escola Superior da Magistratura Federal (Esmafe/RS). Foi Presidente da Associação dos Juízes Federais do Brasil (Ajufe) e da Associação dos Juízes Federais do Rio Grande do Sul (Ajufergs/Esmafe) . Autor de diversos artigos na área do direito ambiental no Brasil e no exterior e dos livros “O desenvolvimento sustentável na era das mudanças climáticas: um direito fundamental” e “Litígios Climáticos: de acordo com o Direito Brasileiro, Norte-Americano e Alemão”. Entrevistadora: Karine da Silva Cordeiro - Juíza Federal e Professora Doutora Assuntos do PodCast: Direito climático no mundo e no Brasil com análise da legislação, da doutrina e da jurisprudência sobre o tema dentro do contexto do Acordo de Paris e do último relatório do IPCC. Qual o papel do Poder Judiciário no contexto das atividades realizadas pelo Grupo de Trabalho “Observatório do Meio Ambiente e das Mudanças Climáticas” do Conselho Nacional de Justiça (CNJ), em especial, nos temas relacionados à magistratura em três pilares: a) integridade; b) ética climática; e c) incremento das pesquisas sobre os litígios climáticos. Informações adicionais: https://www2.trf4.jus.br/trf4/controlador.php?acao=pagina_visualizar&id_pagina=2312
Welcome, you're watching Climate Conversations on Business Watch with Michael Avery, COP26 has arrived and we're discussing whether we're turning the tide on climate change brought to you by Investec. In an effort to ensure the success of the COP26 climate crisis negotiations and achieve the goal of shifting away from coal, this week 40 countries and institutions signed a pledge to end coal financing – but South Africa was missing from the commitment And a draft of the COP26 climate summit deal, published at dawn yesterday, has fired the starting gun on fierce negotiations among countries to clinch a final agreement before the conference ends on Friday. To get the latest on Cop 26 Michael Avery is joined by Olivia Rumble, director at Climate Legal and co-editor and co-author of Climate Change Law and Governance in South Africa; Tanya dos Santos, Global Head of Sustainability for Investec & Tracey Davies, director of Just Share
Phillip De Wet: South Africa has a new Climate change law and Big Business will have to make changes by Radio Islam
Welcome back to Eco-Activist Journeys. I'm finally back with a new episode and it's the start of a new chapter in my eco activist journey. A month ago I started my masters in Global Environment and Climate Change Law at the University of Edinburgh. Furthermore, at the end of October the international UN talks on climate change are taking place in Glasgow. Thus, I am starting my podcast journey again with a series on the Conference of the Parties (COP)! In this episode I introduce what COP26 is and also dive into some new things I learned about the Paris Agreement, international law, and also discuss key topics that leaders need to discuss at the Conference of the Parties (COP) in Glasgow including market-mechanisms for climate finance, loss and damage, agriculture, and nature-based solutions. Hope you enjoy this episode, thanks for tuning in and please follow and support this podcast! All best wishes, Léa
Welcome, you're watching Climate Conversations on Business Watch with Michael Avery, as we build up to COP26 to discuss whether we're turning the tide on climate change brought to you by Investec. Joining Michael is Minister Barbara Creecy, of Forestry and Fisheries and Environmental Affairs; Olivia Rumble, director at Climate Legal and co-editor and co-author of Climate Change Law and Governance in South Africa; Tanya dos Santos, Global Head of Sustainability for Investec and Melissa Fourie, Executive Director of the Centre for Environmental Rights
Water is becoming a real issue in this country. Either we have too much, or we have too little depending on where you are. And for some reason, we keep building houses in flood zones. Why don't we do it today? We learn more about water floods and sea levels.Guest:A.R. Siders - Assistant Professor, Disaster Research Center, University of DelawareShow Links:This is Todayhttps://www.udel.edu/udaily/2021/june/managed-retreat-ar-siders-coastal-cities-future-climate-change/https://theconversation.com/managed-retreat-done-right-can-reinvent-cities-so-theyre-better-for-everyone-and-avoid-harm-from-flooding-heat-and-fires-163052https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/22/climate/sea-level-managed-retreat.htmlAn overview paper of managed retreat in the USA map of which states disclose flood risk ( by NRDC & Columbia Center for Climate Change Law): https://www.nrdc.org/flood-disclosure-map Automated Transcript:[00:00:00] Russ: Water is becoming a real issue in this country. Either we have too much, or we have too little depending on where you are. And for some reason, we keep building houses in flood zones. Why don't we do it today? We learn more about water floods and sea levels.Thanks for listening and thanks for subscribing to learning more where each week we bring you any story about people, inventions, pop culture, and life I'm Russ, and this week. Okay, well, we're continuing a series here in case you haven't noticed, we're talking about climate change. Okay. This one is really interesting to me because there are such extremes here in the United States.I'm in California and each night when we run the dishwasher, we have to see, should we run it? Do we have enough in there? Maybe we should wait a couple of days. We just don't have the water here in the state. So it's a huge problem. On that side of it. And then you turn on the news and you look in various other states and they're literally underwater.We've got a huge problem here and we've got to solve it. We've got to figure it out. So I am joined today by, A.R. Siders an assistant professor from the disaster research center at the University of Delaware. Thank you. Joining me [00:01:31] AR Siders: today. Yeah. Thanks for having me. Uh, as you're talking about the water, the drought, and the flood.I'm reminded. I, I started working on climate change issues when I was working for the US Navy at the time, my boss Admiral Titley used to say that the problem of climate change is all about the water. It's too much, or it's too little it's in the wrong place or at the wrong time. And so I think about that a lot.When it's climate change, it's drought or flood, where's the water coming from? When is it coming? Is it snowpack? Is it melt? What's happening with it, but yeah, water. Is that the basis of all of this?[00:02:00] Russ: Totally. And you summed up the whole issue right there. I mean, there's too much or too little.I have this dream of like, why don't we just put pipes somewhere and pipe it to California? We can use it. We don't [00:02:16] AR Siders: have any, no, and it's true. Right. But then, so I grew up in Minnesota on lake superior. And so when you talk about pipes, you know, at one point there was, I don't know if it was an urban legend or a real plan, but at one point there was talk about putting a pipe out of lake superior, taking water from the great lakes up to California, or, you know, after the west and the dry.And of course, then everyone who loves the great lakes and their ecosystem sort of, oh no, we're going to destroy these ecosystems. Cause it sounds so simple to move it around, but actually it becomes really complicated in terms of how you, you spread out those, [00:02:48] Russ: those effects.Okay. So let's talk through it first. Okay. We've got the drought issues, but right now, you know, and you don't know when this is going to happen, it can happen at any point. There's coastal flooding and there's sea-level rise, and they're still. Building houses in these areas. [00:03:12] AR Siders: So sea-level rise, this is one of the climate change consequences that we talk about the most.I think it's because it's one of the most obvious and it's the one you sort of see happening. Right? You can watch the tide gauges go up, you can see how that's, uh, coming and it sort of. It's still uncertain, but in some ways, it's more predictable than saying how climate change will affect hurricanes or will it affect hurricanes.Right. There's a lot more uncertainty about that than sea-level rise. Uh, and then, yeah, you, you said it we're building in the. Flood-prone areas we're actually building faster in the United States, in flood-prone areas than we are outside of cleverly. Uh, in Delaware, for example, we're building two and a half times faster in some places inside, uh, inside flood zones that are, have a 10% chance of flooding every year.So. It sounds crazy, but there's such a demand to put housing there. And so you have this mix of demand to put more housing, people wanting those sort of short-term economic benefits. They want to be near the coast. And then the long-term consequences of what happens when then the sea level rises when the beach erodes, when these floods happen and all of that is put at risk, uh, and it creates this, this huge problem, which from an academic standpoint is fascinating to study and try to dig into.All of the [00:04:25] Russ: complications. Should we be really like living next to the coast and doing this? Making mistake after mistake and building these houses. [00:04:33] AR Siders: The real core of the question, right, is what is the value? Why do some people feel the need to live there? Whereas other people feel like they could live nearby and visit the coast.Uh, and I think different states in different communities have really different answers to that. Thinking about this. Like living on the coast because they like being near the beach. It's forms part of their identity. It has all these wonderful amenities. Um, but yeah, there is this fundamental question of, is that a place where people should live?Like when you go back in history, you know, a hundred years ago or 200 years ago, a lot of people didn't build next to the coast that wasn't desirable housing. Risk Chrome, because they knew that if a flood happened or a hurricane happened, their house would be damaged. And it's more recently as we've built more levies and we've done engineering that people start thinking, oh, maybe that's okay.Maybe we can engineer our way out of this problem. And so we build more and more. And now I think we're getting, we're swinging back on that pendulum to the point where maybe we actually can't engineer our way out of this entire problem. Right. I mean, we can limit that problem, but in some places. That doesn't work.And so we're trying to find other solutions. And I think that's what we're starting to talk about. One of the things I study is managed to treat as people who actually relocate away from these risk-prone areas because they started to realize that maybe living there. It isn't the safest idea or the best idea economically.[00:05:54] Russ: I saw some of that in your research. Okay. Let's get into that a little bit. The managed retreat. I thought these were some great ideas, but share that a [00:06:04] AR Siders: little bit with us. So when we think about adaptation to risks in general, I think about climate change adaptation, we talk about categories. Options.So you can sort of resist. And we talked about resist. Usually. We mean, say building a flood wall, you prevent the water from reaching your house. You can accommodate the water. So maybe you elevate your home. The water comes and it goes, but you're high and dry. So there's less damage being done. You can retreat.Move your house away from the floodwater. So the water comes and goes and you're not there. So it doesn't matter. Or you can avoid, which is don't build there in the first place. Uh, and we're not doing a great job at avoiding, but you know, now that we had these buildings there, like once you've put a home in the flood, plain, Then you're kind of looking at it thinking, well, what do we do now?Right. And those are the big categories of options. There are tons of options within each of those categories, but those are the big options. And historically the US like in the last century, we've mostly been doing resistance and accommodation. So we've been elevating homes, building levees, building floodwalls, trying to shore up the shore and keep people in their homes.And more recently, just in the last few decades, we started to see more people, more communities thinking about. Maybe some of these homes need to move. Maybe some of these homeowners want to move, right? They're sick of living behind a floodwall or they're sick of being flooded all the time, but it's a really challenging strategy, right?People live where they live for a lot of good reasons and some of them are really loath to leave [00:07:24] Russ: there. What about like a hybrid solution where you've got multiple different ways of, uh, or, or you're taking those various managed retreat solutions and putting them all together? [00:07:37] AR Siders: I think this is what we're going to have to see in the future because we tend to talk about these as though they're alternatives.Like either, we're going to build a floodwall or we're going to do manage a retreat, or we're going to elevate. And one of the reasons they can feel like alternatives is different federal agencies fund different strategies. So the US Army Corps of Engineers mostly funds building seawalls. Whereas FEMA mostly.Uh, home elevation and property buyouts and HUD helps with property buyouts. So you kind of have to do different agencies and it could feel like you have to do one or the other. But the best solutions are probably going to involve all of the above. Right? When we think about Miami and how it's going to deal with sea-level rise, it's probably going to have some seawalls, some home elevations, some neighborhoods relocating, and some other strategies, dune renourishment and wetland restoration, all types of things.Uh, you know, you think about the categories, like the ingredients in a recipe, and you can create different recipes depending on how you mix them and how much you have of each different option. We don't want to have one thing. That's all retreat or one place. That's all resistance. You're probably going to have a mix of the above.And the tricky bit is figuring out how much of each one makes sense in a given [00:08:46] Russ: that's kind of the happy medium in all of this, right? Like you're getting the best of both worlds. You know, because you're doing this. Okay. Well, you think about the seawalls, like, and you know, we have, uh, in the city I live in, we do have, there's a small seawall.Uh, that's protecting some of these houses that they built below flood level, which is why did they do that? I don't know, but they did. So they have the sea wall. And, you know, they've got like some areas where you can walk on the seawall and all of that, but really those houses, they have zero views of the water now because of the seawall.So it's like, okay, you're missing out on that. So perhaps if there was a hybrid solution, you can have the seawalls a little bit lower. The house is a little more elevated and maybe it is making things a little bit [00:09:37] AR Siders: better. We, we are going to see a lot of hybrids and, you know, you raise an interesting point, which is that.All of these strategies have trade-offs they all have pros and cons, right? You're behind a levee. Great. Your home is safer. The water can't get in, at least as long as the Levy's maintained. And if it's well, it's a good levy. Uh, but yeah, you lose your view of the ocean. And I think this is the part where we start having to have some really tough conversations as communities to think about what matters most to you.Do you care most about living here? You know, in this exact neighborhood, in this exact house, do you care most about having a view of the ocean? Do you care most about having access to the beach? Because building that levy might destroy access to the beach. If the water rises up to the point where it meets the levy and there's no sand on the beachside.So, you know, we have to start thinking about which of these things is our priority, and those are really hard conversations. And that's an answer where there isn't a writer. Engineering answer, right? That's not something you can plug into a mathematical formula and say, this is right or wrong. That's our value.Yeah. That's our personal, [00:10:38] Russ: emotional attachment to the area. [00:10:41] AR Siders: What are your emotions about it? And people have really strong emotions, really strong opinions about their communities. And so, so these conversations, aren't going to be scientific engineering. Here's the right answer. They're going to have to be these harder, more emotional conversations about what we want the community to look like in the future.Right. That's really challenging because those emotions are hard. So it's really difficult conversations, uh, you know, examples of communities that start fighting over this and, and it can really, really cause a lot heartache at the same time. Uh, mostly because climate change can be so depressing to talk about.I try to find the optimism and I think this is an area where you can be optimistic like while we're thinking about what really matters to us, let's talk about how we could do better at emphasizing whatever. Yeah. That we care about most [00:11:31] Russ: well, and that's going to be so different per person, like in, in one community, you could have people wanting different things in one city.You're definitely gonna have that. How do we keep this equitable? How do we keep this fair? When making these types of [00:11:45] AR Siders: decisions? The big question that comes up with this sort of equity and fairness is. Whose homes are going to be protected behind a flood wall and whose homes are going to be relocated.And what you worry about, what you don't want to see is you don't want to see all the rich homes, the wealthy homes being protected and the low-income neighborhoods being relocated and forced out. Right? You want to make sure that this is being done in a way that's fair to everyone and is, and doesn't just give the amenities of being on the coast to wealthy homeowners.And that's a problem. That seems to be what we're seeing right now is that more wealthy homeowners are getting protected with, by floodwalls, uh, because they can pay for them on their own or because the local government wants to protect those property taxes. Aright and lower-income neighborhoods maybe are getting relocated more often because it doesn't, it's not cost-effective to them.A flood wall in front of a lower income [00:12:37] Russ: neighborhood right now. Okay. So I didn't write this down, but you mentioned earlier some of the, um, government organizations that are managing this there, the retreat method is different per the organization. Is that just, we're seeing certain communities move because that's the organization or the government organization that's going in.Is that why that changes? Well, so [00:12:58] AR Siders: this, that's actually a really interesting question and it's one I want to learn more about. Uh, so that's actually one of the research questions I'm hoping to find out more about. Uh, I, I wonder if that's happening, right. A disaster occurs. And if the US Army Corps is the first person to show up and they say, Hey, we have money for a flood wall.And if FEMA shows up first and says, Hey, we have money for flood out for home elevations, you elevate homes. Right. And I don't know how much the community is really sitting down and say, Is a flood wall best or is the elevation [00:13:25] Russ: best. Yeah. And that's perhaps the only advice that they're getting and, you know, when, when the only, uh, tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, right.That, that old saying everything was [00:13:34] AR Siders: like, yeah, well, and this is an area where I think it's one of the reasons, um, that historically we've built so many levees and so many flood walls, right. It's like, uh, they worked for a while. They worked in certain circumstances. Using that hammer. And so everything looks like a build a flood wall solution.Right? Right. And now we're starting to see that, Hey, maybe putting levies all along the Mississippi actually has caused some real problems because of the way it's changed sediment and change flooding. And we're not maintaining those levies. Right. Those are expensive things to maintain. So when they're not maintained, Think they're safe, but they're actually not safe.And when those levies are over-talked or they break anyway. Yeah. It's, there's a problem with relying on just one strategy is that you can tend to overuse it in scenarios where maybe it wasn't the right answer, just because it worked somewhere else doesn't mean it's going to work. All right. [00:14:23] Russ: So we got to get into some of the money spent by the government and some of the ways that the government is handling this, we'll get into that.We'll take a short break here. When we come back, we'll continue the conversation.If you enjoy history, maybe you're just feeling a little nostalgic or you wonder who's having a birthday today, or maybe you need a reason to celebrate. Well, we've got the perfect podcast for you. It is called, this is today and each and every day we talk about the historical. Celebrity birthdays. We also talk about whatever is going on today.There's always something to celebrate when you listen to this is today, right? And it is just 10 minutes each day, you can make it a daily habit. You can even add it to your Alexa flash briefing, click the link in the description, or just search in your favorite podcast app or. Is [00:15:23] AR Siders: today. [00:15:26] Russ: Thanks for listening and subscribing to learning more we're underwater.In this episode, we're talking water, we're talking ways to adapt to our changing climate. It's a frustrating and interesting topic, and we're also trying to put a positive spin on it. I'm talking with AR Siders and assistant professor. I want to talk a little about the money behind all of this and specifically the government.Yeah. That was spent on this billion of dollars spent on cleaning up after a disaster. But I don't really hear about the money going in to help us upfront to prevent that disaster. It almost feels like the government is like, let's have the insurance companies pay for this, or let's have personal people pay for this instead of us.Yeah. Is that happening or what's going on here? [00:16:15] AR Siders: All right. All right. There are these two pieces, right? So the first bit is like the mitigation. So reducing the risk, preventing the disaster from happening versus paying for it afterward. And you're spot on that. Historically, the US has done so much more on post-disaster recovery.We spend hundreds of billions of dollars post-disaster recovery, right. And we spend very little pre-disaster. Mitigation, uh, there's an effort to change this. Uh, FEMA now has a program called brick building resilient infrastructure and communities, and it's supposed to be aimed explicitly at trying to reduce risk.It's had other programs in the past. FEMA has, but this is supposed to be a bigger program with more emphasis on how do we reduce risk? One of the real challenges. Is the federal government doesn't have the authority to stop people from building in floodplains or fire-prone areas? That's a local guy. And the local government doesn't have an incentive to do it, right?So if a local government gets more money, the more houses they build, cause they get property tax revenue, they get the population boosts, et cetera. So there's some great work by Linda Shai showing that local governments actually have a financial incentive to build more homes. Even if they know that they're in a hazard prone.And the federal government doesn't have any authority to prevent that is then left holding the bill when those homes are flooded or burned down or destroyed in a disaster. So there's this real mix between who's paying for it. And who has the authority to reduce the risk in the first place? It's a FEMA stuck in the middle, trying to use this money to try to incentivize local governments to take action.That's hard cause they're fighting against all of these, these incentives. And then the other thing you mentioned with the insurance companies is like that's a whole, uh, that's a whole kind of worms on its own. Um, so the real question was insurance. What do you do when the insurance companies won't insure a property when it's too risky?So with flood-prone properties back in the sixties, a bunch of flood insurance companies said it is too risky. You are building homes in areas that are so risky that we will not insure them. So the federal government created the national flood insurance program, and we're still running it today. And so the federal government actually provides flood insurance for homes that are located in the flood plain.And I love the quote. One guy writes about this. He says it's like a car insurance company that only provides policies to drunk 16-year-old boys. That's it? That's the only, like the only people you give this to are people who, you know, will have access, right? Because we're all living in flood insurance policies to people we know we'd be flooded.And so as a result, this program is bankrupt. Like it, you know, it's, it's overdrawn. Yeah, it doesn't get enough money. So there are all kinds of efforts trying to fix it. And it's a huge problem. And now we're seeing the problem happen with wildfire because now wildlife fire insurance companies are saying, Hey, these wildfires are so big.We don't want to insure these homes anymore. And states like California are saying, whoa, if you don't insure these homes, what's going to happen to the homeowners when that home burns down. And so I think there is this idea. Do you have, like, you want the insurance companies to do more and they're trying to do more because they are?Hundreds of billions of dollars. And look at reinsurance companies who insure the insurance companies were paying all this it's hugely expensive to them and they want more action taken. But again, you have to create an incentive for the local government to actually step in and say, no, you shouldn't build there in the first place.And that's really hard to convince a local government to do you have to stand up to a developer to stand up for a homeowner and say, no, you can't build, or you can't rebuild. Right? [00:19:43] Russ: Yeah. Well, you know, you mentioned California. I mean, one of them, the issues that we have in California is the the state is essentially forcing more houses to be built because they want lower-income houses, which makes sense.There's also this factor. Where, where are those being built? Are they being built in areas that are [00:20:05] AR Siders: disaster-prone? It's a huge, huge problem. Uh, I mean our most work, mostly in flood, but nationally government-sponsored housing. So government-subsidized, affordable housing. Yeah. Some estimates are 10% of that is inside the flood plain.Wow. So we're building affordable housing for people who need government-subsidized housing, and we're putting it in areas where these people are going to experience floods. And it's a real challenge everywhere, right? The housing crisis, but it does suggest that we have to come up. Some new strategies.And this is, you know, trying to be optimistic again like this is where I try to see the optimism that I think there are a lot of creative strategies for how we can build affordable housing, how we can build more densely in the cities we have. If we choose to go that route, right. It's about, are we really ready to prioritize, building safe, affordable housing, right.And I'm not sure that that's really been a priority. The wage. And if it were, we could find strategies to do that. [00:20:56] Russ: Okay. I said we tried to take it on a, on a bit of a problem. No, it's hard [00:21:02] AR Siders: sometimes I know. [00:21:03] Russ: Yeah. Let's talk about some of the spendings on infrastructure bills. Uh, there's one that could happen right now.Let's talk about that. If you were in charge, what would you put inside of an infrastructure bill? [00:21:16] AR Siders: I think one of the things is long-term maintenance for our folks. Management infrastructure. Uh, so the United States has hundreds of miles and more than that, of levees and floodwalls all across the United States, uh, and the American society of civil engineers, it goes in and grades, this infrastructure, right?A through F and only 8%. Is considered an acceptable condition. Wow. So that means 92% of the floodwalls that people are living behind are not considered to be an acceptable condition. They need to be updated and they estimate that it would cost a hundred billion dollars just to repair them, not to put them up to climate change levels, not to increase them, not to do any future maintenance, just to get them all to an acceptable level.And then you're talking $15 billion a year after that every year, just to maintain them. The infrastructure bills that come in and they give a short, uh, influx of money are great. But you have to wonder about where is that 15 billion every year going to come from, not from the next five years, the next 10 years of the bill, but for the next hundred years.Yeah. Right. And that's, that's a really big question. And when we're thinking about climate change adaptation, we're thinking. We have to be thinking in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Uh, I mean, I mean the price tag is going to be enormous, whether we do retreat or we built floodwalls or we elevate homes, it's going to be gigantic.And it doesn't feel like we've actually started planning for that in a, I don't know, in a realistic way. Well, so when you see [00:22:45] Russ: the price tag of $15 billion a year, I would think we probably spend more than that on like, you know, fixing the issues after they've happened. Right. Well, this [00:22:56] AR Siders: goes back to that push of where do you spend your money?Right? Most of the calculations that come out estimate somewhere between. Well, I've seen as much as for every dollar you spend on flood mitigation. So building flood walls, relocating homes, elevating them, you save $4 down the road. Uh, and some people will go as high as $8 saved. So if you think about that, that's a 400%, you know, the 800% investment.That's a, that's a really solid investment. But convincing, especially local governments or especially spending say small towns who maybe are struggling with their budgets anyway, to try to combat that cash upfront is really hard. Right. They know they might save money down the line, but, but coming up with that tax, the upfront capital investment, I think is part of the trick.So how do we do that? Well, [00:23:46] Russ: it just feels like, I mean, you know, every year. Every podcast. I talk about either, you know, about city planning or, you know, future-proofing or future planning. Like we're, we've always been, um, very much about today and not about tomorrow. So it goes along with that theme, unfortunately, and there's very little that we can do aside.You know, vote, I guess, as far as the federal government [00:24:11] AR Siders: level is really important though. And actually, I've become convinced that, uh, anyone listening to this podcast, like one of the real challenges is get involved in your local planning board because your local planning board is the person who's deciding whether affordable housing is built, whether they invest in repairing flood infrastructure and whether or not they build new homes in the flood plain.And so few people actually participate. In local planning boards that you can have a real difference if you show up and make your voice. [00:24:41] Russ: Yeah. Well, that's what I was saying on the federal level. You can't do much, but on the local level, yeah. You can jump in and actually [00:24:47] AR Siders: make a different levels where we need, we need action at the local level right now.That's where we need people to speak out. Right. [00:24:52] Russ: So I, uh, one of my first jobs is a cameraman at a city council meeting. Wow, that sounds like a tough, uh, there were nights, I felt like they would never end, but the thing was, you know, you got the same few people going in there over and over and over again, to try to make this point.And I just always thought as I was sitting there, um, aside from how do I stay awake tonight? Um, but I always thought like if more people came in here and actually made a point about something. I think more things would get done. Yeah. Okay. So outside of the government, let's talk about just us personally, what can we do to make a difference?[00:25:38] AR Siders: Well, okay. So usually my answer to that is to go to the planning boards, right. Is engaged with the local government because I think it. The United States has had such a tradition of wanting local governments, like towns and cities to have authority. But that really depends on the people who are participating, but so really engaging, I think is incredibly important.The other thing I'll note is to educate yourself because, so for example, when you purchase a new home, right? If you're, if you're buying or if you're renting some stuff, You're the seller is required to tell you that your home is in the floodplain and that you are at risk and that you'll have to buy flood insurance and so forth.But in some states you're not, there's no requirement like Florida, Massachusetts. There is no requirement for the home seller to tell you that the home has a history of flooding, that it is in the flood, plain, that you will be required to purchase flood insurance. So. Uh, it really puts the onus on the buyer to educate yourself about flood risk.And I say this because I really worry about you reading these news stories about people whose homes flooded and they say, wow, I wish I'd known that it flooded before I bought it before I made this huge financial decision and put my family at risk, et cetera. And we need to fix the systems we need to.Create systems that will give people that information. But in the meantime, you can really help by educating yourself about it and trying to, to take that step because that'll, that'll help push the system to fix it. Yeah. [00:27:02] Russ: The other thing I would mention is if you're buying a home in a flood area or a wildfire look up the insurance before you actually make that offer.Because it can be expensive. It can be. [00:27:15] AR Siders: Yeah. Sometimes you're talking tens of thousands of dollars [00:27:17] Russ: a year. Yeah. Hey, thank you so much for joining me today and talking to us about, [00:27:20] AR Siders: yeah. Thank you for discussing this issue. It's always great to have more conversations about these things. They're hard to talk about, but they don't get easier for avoiding them.[00:27:30] Russ: And you know what? There is another positive. We're not avoiding it. We're talking about it right. At three episodes on climate change over the last three. Weeks. I thank you for listening to those. I thank you for subscribing. If you missed any of those episodes, Hey, they're right there. Just subscribe to the podcast, go back and listen to the last couple of ex episodes and you know what next. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
In our last episode of Season 4 on Climate Change, Josh chats to Paul Govind and Mark McVeigh on how climate change and the law are increasingly intertwined through both environmental litigation and community-led activism. Paul is a Lecturer at the Centre for Environmental Law at Macquarie University Law School; his research and interest focussing on the relationship between climate adaptation, extinction, responsibility and environmental law. Josh and Paul discuss climate litigation, how to contextualise the law in a climate change era and how the environmental law fits into our globalised world. Mark is a pioneer in the way of ensuring companies are held accountable for the risks of climate change. In 2018, then only 23 years old, Mark filed a suit against Rest, the $57bn superfund, alleging that they failed to provide information on climate change business risks and their plans to address the risks. Josh and Mark discuss the impacts of this case, how necessary it is to hold companies accountable for the risks of climate change, as well as how the law is an integral tool in aiding climate change mitigation. For more info and to connect with both our fascinating guests, check out Mark's LinkedIn and Paul's blog ‘Law and Nature Dialogue'. FOLLOW US: Follow Global Questions on Instagram, Facebook and Twitter for more content! Find more about Young Diplomats Society on our website. CREDITS: This episode is produced by the Young Diplomats Society on the lands of the Wurundjeri/Gadigal people. We pay our respects to the traditional custodians of the lands upon which we operate and live.
Former federal prosecutor Jimmy Gurule, a professor at Notre Dame Law School, discusses the charges against Trump ally Tom Barrack, the founder of investment firm Colony Capital, that he illegally lobbied the U.S. government on behalf of the United Arab Emirates and lied to the FBI about it. Michael Gerrard, a professor at Columbia Law School and faculty director of Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, discusses his article for Bloomberg Law, "Killer Heat Waves Warrant FEMA Action Under New Authority." June Grasso hosts. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
Former federal prosecutor Jimmy Gurule, a professor at Notre Dame Law School, discusses the charges against Trump ally Tom Barrack, the founder of investment firm Colony Capital, that he illegally lobbied the U.S. government on behalf of the United Arab Emirates and lied to the FBI about it. Michael Gerrard, a professor at Columbia Law School and faculty director of Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, discusses his article for Bloomberg Law, "Killer Heat Waves Warrant FEMA Action Under New Authority." June Grasso hosts. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
Is a country still a country if it's underwater? Migration of people as a result of climate change is happening already on every continent. University Professor Michael W. Doyle and Ama Francis, non-resident fellow at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, delve into climate migration with host Michael B. Gerrard and discuss how existing human rights law and international cooperation can protect people fleeing the destructive forces of climate change.
Litigation may be the most effective tool for curbing carbon emissions when legislative and political solutions fall short. Michael Burger of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and Peter Lehner of Earthjustice join host Michael B. Gerrard to discuss the power of courts around the world in combating climate change.
Die Sonderreihe "UNrecht" des UNhörbar-Podcastes der DGVN Sachsen, Sachsen-Anhalt und Thüringen führt in Thematiken des Völkerrechts ein. Dazu wird Vanessa Vohs (Twitter: @VohsVanessa), Master-Studentin im Völkerrecht an der London School of Economics and Political Science, in verschiedenen Episoden Interviews führen und das Völkerrecht in Zusammenhang mit internationaler Politik und den Vereinten Nationen bringen. In dieser Folge spricht Vanessa mit Dariush Kraft, der zurzeit Rechtsreferendar am Oberlandesgericht Dresden ist. Studiert hat er zuvor Jura an der HU Berlin und im Anschluss hat er einen LL.M. in „Global Environment and Climate Change Law“ an der University of Edinburgh absolviert. Wir fragen diesmal: Gibt es das Umweltvölkerrecht überhaupt? Sind das alles nur nichtbindende Deklarationen? Wieso hat Argentinien Uruguay wegen eines umweltvölkerrechtlichen Anliegens vor den Internationalen Gerichtshof gebracht? Was sagt das Pariser-Klimaabkommen noch mal genau? Und kann die nächste Weltklimakonferenz COP26 neue Fortschritte erreichen? All das erfahrt ihr in dieser Folge von UNrecht. Literaturempfehlungen: „International Law and the Environment“ von Birnie, Boyle and Redgwell Klimaschutz: „The Oxford Handbook of International Climate Change Law“ von Gray, Tarasofsky, and Carlarne (2016) Zum Schluss bleibt der Aufruf an EUCH, Kritik/Wünsche/Anregungen/ Fragen an unrecht@dgvn-mitteldeutschland.de zu senden.
The climate crisis threatens the stability of our planet and our very way of life. In this interview, we explore the power of U.S. law to help stimulate innovation and the change to clean and renewable fuels. Michael Gerrard, professor at Columbia Law School and the director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, gives insight into legal changes to date, analyzes the impact of the Trump Administration, and explores the dramatic changes of the Biden administration to combat the dangerous warming of our planet.
Fashion's New Cotton Project, plus 43 Banks Form NetZero Alliance. Amazon Set To Become EU's Largest Renewable Energy Customer, and EU Passes Even More Ambitious Legislative Climate Goals.
Russia Pledges 1,000 Electric Buses on Moscow Streets by 2022, plus China Crushes Both America and Russia in the Race To Replace Diesel Buses With Electric. Maryland Passes The “Climate Solutions Now Act Of 2021" and A One Planet Summit Recap.
Hear how Con Edison is leading the way energy companies are thinking about climate change—designing the grid of the future to improve resiliency and sustainability. Con Edison’s manager of strategic planning, Charles Viemeister and @MichaelGerrard, founder and director of Columbia Law’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law highlight the plans.
On March 31, the Markets at Risk initiative at Brookings, in collaboration with the Environmental Defense Fund and the Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, hosted an event exploring these issues. https://www.brookings.edu/events/the-rising-impacts-of-climate-change-implications-for-science-law-capital-markets-and-policy/ Subscribe to Brookings Events on iTunes, send feedback email to events@brookings.edu, and follow us and tweet us at @policypodcasts on Twitter. To learn more about upcoming events, visit our website. Brookings Events is part of the Brookings Podcast Network.
Michael Gerrard, grandfather to a curious, vivacious granddaughter, is one of the world’s leading environmental lawyers and Climate Change experts. Michael is the Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice at Columbia Law School, where he teaches courses on environmental and energy law. He is also the faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law which develops legal techniques to fight climate change, trains students and lawyers in the use of these techniques and provides up-to-date resources and thought leadership on key topics in Climate Change law and regulation. To date, Michael has authored or edited 13 books on Climate Change and Environmental Law, including a thought-provoking and inspiring new book called: Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States. He has also traversed the globe – from Malta to Chile to Taiwan to the Marshall Islands to lecture and advise leaders on Climate Change and Environmental Law.
This week, Michael Gerrard of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law joins the show to discuss the changing Supreme Court, Judge Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearing and comments on climate change, the EPA, climate liability lawsuits, and how climate action can be accomplished in the courts. Co-hosts Ty Benefiel and Brock Benefiel also discuss the rising costs of the California wildfires and the federal response to relief. As always, follow us @climatepod on Twitter and email us at theclimatepod@gmail.com. Our music is "Gotta Get Up" by The Passion Hifi, check out his music at thepassionhifi.com. Rate, review and subscribe to this podcast on iTunes, Spotify, Stitcher, and more! Subscribe to our new YouTube channel! Check out our updated website! Further Reading: TRUMP V. THE CLIMATE, ROUND TWO: WHAT FOUR MORE YEARS OF TRUMP MIGHT MEAN FOR CLIMATE REGULATION Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States
Environmental law has existed since around the 1960s, however only recently have litigations pivoted to address the concerns of growing emission levels and a warming climate. In this episode Tessa speaks with David Barnden, the founder and principal lawyer of Equity Generation Lawyers - a law firm that specialises in Australian climate change law. They discuss the history of environmental regulation in australia, the recent EPBC Act review, how covid is affecting the legal system, the economic impact of climate change inaction on investments and our global reputation, and of course the three high profile and progressive cases he's currently working on. Before starting up Equity Generation David was also a principal lawyer at Environmental Justice Australia, and an associate at social justice law firm Maurice Blackburn. Beyond this David also has a background in applied sciences and coastal management, plus we heard he was a fellow surfer....so knew he'd be good egg! Stay up to date by subscribing, and following on TNBU socials @thenaturebetweenuspodcast
Madison Alder, Bloomberg Law Reporter, discusses how judges are using unconventional methods to restart jury trials, as their caseloads pile up. Michael Gerrard, the founder and faculty director of Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, discusses actions a Biden administration could take to reverse the climate deregulation carried out by the Trump administration. June Grasso hosts. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
Madison Alder, Bloomberg Law Reporter, discusses how judges are using unconventional methods to restart jury trials, as their caseloads pile up. Michael Gerrard, the founder and faculty director of Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, discusses actions a Biden administration could take to reverse the climate deregulation carried out by the Trump administration. June Grasso hosts.
Guests: Professor Michael Gerrard, Founder and Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, Ben Emons, Managing Director of Global Macro Strategy at Medley Global Advisors, Jack Kingston, Former Republican Georgia Congressman, and Trump 2020 campaign surrogate, A. Scott Bolden, Democratic strategist, Former D.C. Democratic Party Chairman and attorney, and Rep. Greg Stanton, a Democrat representing Arizona's 9th Congressional district.
Guests: Professor Michael Gerrard, Founder and Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, Ben Emons, Managing Director of Global Macro Strategy at Medley Global Advisors, Jack Kingston, Former Republican Georgia Congressman, and Trump 2020 campaign surrogate, A. Scott Bolden, Democratic strategist, Former D.C. Democratic Party Chairman and attorney, and Rep. Greg Stanton, a Democrat representing Arizona's 9th Congressional district.
Join Michael Gerrard, Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice, Columbia Law School, Faculty Director for the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and CCL Advisory Board member for a training on the Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization. His team's research provides a “legal playbook” for deep decarbonization in the United States, identifying well over 1,000 model laws based on two reports by the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP) that explain technical and policy pathways for reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. Gerrard will also identify changes needed in federal, state, and local law to help achieve these reductions and highlight ways that CCL volunteers can be engaged in highlighting these model laws out to federal, state, and local legislators. Skip ahead to the following section(s):Four Pillars of a Net-Zero or Net-Negative Energy System (6:08)Twelve Types of Legal Tools (14:50)Legal Pathways Section-By-Section Review (19:55)Mobilizing Pro Bono Lawyers (41:19) Join CCL: https://cclusa.org/join Model Laws for Deep Decarbonization in the United States: https://lpdd.org/ Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States: https://www.eli.org/legal-pathways-deep-decarbonization-united-states-summary-and-key-recommendations
In this episode of Heat of the Moment, climate change is forcing people from their homes, especially in island nations. Host John D. Sutter speaks with Ama Francis, a native of Dominica and a climate law fellow at Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law about ways to change immigration policy to help those whose homelands have been destroyed. In the second part of the episode, the reporter Philip Nii Lartey takes us to Ghana, where the Climate Investment Funds’ Forest Investment Program (FIP) is helping to persuade cocoa farmers stay on their land. With the aid of FIP, farmers are improving yields and mitigating climate change by planting shade trees to protect their cocoa fields. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Scott Deatherage is a founding partner in the Austin law firm of Smith and Brown, LLP. Over the last 30 years, Scott has focused on environmental issues, energy, and climate change. For most of his career, he worked with large law firms in Dallas, but two years ago he formed his own firm and also began pursuing entrepreneurial opportunities. He earned his B.A. in Letters from The University of Oklahoma in 1984 with highest honors, with minors in Botany and French, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1987 cum laude, where he served as the Articles Editor for the Harvard Environmental Law Review. Scott was one of the founders of the American Bar Association’s Environmental Disclosure Committee. He has published a book entitled Carbon Trading Law and Practice, originally published by Oxford University Press. He has taught Climate Change Law at the University of Texas Law School. Over the last 30 years of his career, Scott has focused on environmental issues, energy, and climate change. As a partner in nationally-known large law firms, he has advised clients in transactions, development, litigation, and government regulatory matters. He has also worked with companies in emerging technologies such as renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy storage. Scott has worked on over $5 billion of energy projects. His work with solar project developers has involved over 55 separate projects. Over the last few years, Scott has represented companies in blockchain technology, cryptocurrency, cryptocurrency mining, and smart contracts. He has served and currently serves on several company advisory boards, including, Principal Solar, Crescendo Power, Alternative Resource Group, and AR3 Global. These companies are engaged in solar development, funding of solar and other renewable energy and energy storage projects, and blockchain applications to energy and environmental matters.
Michael Gerrard, grandfather to a curious, vivacious granddaughter, is one of the world’s leading environmental lawyers and Climate Change experts. Michael is the Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice at Columbia Law School, where he teaches courses on environmental and energy law. He is also the faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law which develops legal techniques to fight climate change, trains students and lawyers in the use of these techniques and provides up-to-date resources and thought leadership on key topics in Climate Change law and regulation. To date, Michael has authored or edited 13 books on Climate Change and Environmental Law, including a thought-provoking and inspiring new book called: Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States. He has also traversed the globe - from Malta to Chile to Taiwan to the Marshall Islands to lecture and advise leaders on Climate Change and Environmental Law.
What does the New York Exxon Trial mean? For the Country? The world? And moreover, what should we be doing about climate change? Aaron Freiwald, Managing Partner of Freiwald Law and host of the weekly podcast, Good Law | Bad Law, is joined by Michael Gerrard, a law professor at Columbia Law School and the founder and director at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, to discuss the breaking news happing in New York this week regarding the trial against Exxon Mobil, the implications that this trial has had already and may continue to have, as well as the issue of climate change itself. In today’s episode, Aaron and Michael talk about the specifics of the New York Exxon Trial, the legal arguments surrounding the suit, and more. Michael and Aaron talk about this case’s potential impacts, considering it a possible bellwether case, and the notion of other states likely following New York’s example – specifically discussing Massachusetts recent filing against the oil giant. Aaron and Michael debate the role of these trials, considering the idea of these court records being documentation proving the existence and real threat of climate change. Michael explains some more substantive actions we can do in addition to filing these lawsuits, describing some more direct ways we can impact the emission of green house gases. A graduate of Columbia and New York University School of Law, Michael teaches courses on environmental law, climate change law, and energy regulation. The Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice at Columbia Law School, he chaired the faculty of Columbia University’s Earth Institute from 2015 to 2018. From 1979 through 2008, he practiced environmental law in New York, most recently as partner in charge of the New York Office of Arnold & Porter. Upon joining the Law School faculty in 2009, Michael became the senior counsel to the firm. His practice involved trying numerous cases and arguing many appeals in federal and state courts and administrative tribunals; handling the environmental aspects of numerous transactions and development projects; and providing regulatory compliance advice to a wide variety of clients in the private and public sectors. An author on the subjects of environmental law and climate change, Michael twice received the Association of American Publisher’s Best Law Book award for works on environmental law and brownfields. He has written or edited thirteen books, including Global Climate Change and U.S. Law, the leading work in its field, and the 12-volume Environmental Law Practice Guide. His most recent book is Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States. To find more information about Michael Gerrard, please check out his Columbia Law bio here. To find out more about the Sabin Center for Climate Change law, please visit their website here. To find the New York complaint against Exxon, please click here. To find the Massachusetts complaint against Exxon, please click here. Please follow this link to Michael’s co-authored book, “Legal Pathways to Deep Decarbonization in the United States,” by clicking here. To learn more about the pro-bono project that is developing model laws and regulations aimed at helping fight climate change, please click here. To read Michael Gerrard’s Law 360 article, “How Lawyers Can Help Save The Planet,” please click here. Host: Aaron Freiwald Guest: Michael Gerrard Follow Good Law | Bad Law: YouTube: Good Law | Bad Law Instagram: @GoodLawBadLaw Website: https://www.law-podcast.com
At age 15, Krishnee was diagnosed with bipolar and severe anxiety disorder - fast forward 15 years later to Krishnee founding a mental health organization, Mind Matters. In this talk, Krishnee opens up about her personal journey, the state of mental health in Mauritius, and how her foundation serves as a one-stop centre and a national convener for raising awareness and dismantling still existing cultural taboos. Krishnee serves as a Lecturer in Law at the University of Mauritius where she lectures on Environmental Law, Climate Change Law and Policy, and Mauritian Legal System. As an activist and enabler for YOUNGO, the official youth constituency of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, Krishnee serves to empower young people in the climate change space. As a Global Shaper of the Port Louis Hub, Krishnee has been part of the award-winning #SeeingBlue project, which aims at building the capacity of young ocean champions in Mauritius.More information on Mind Matters: Website: www.mind-matters-mauritius.orgFacebook: www.facebook.com/MindMattersMauritiusInstagram: @mind.matters.mauritius
Episode 5: In this episode, the host, Angie Gust, continues discussing John Travis’s 12 dimensions of wellness as a way to improve your own personal health and wellness. This episode focuses on moving and how the benefits of moving are associated not only with physical health, but mental health as well. She also discusses some good news in energy production, for instance, the bi-facial solar panel, and a couple examples of using the legal system to protect our planet. Several personal actions are suggested so that everyone can be part of the solution. References Ambrose, J. BP solar firm blazes ahead in search for UK's shiniest grass. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jul/08/bp-solar-subsidiary-sees-the-light-in-search-for-uk-shiniest-grass-lightsource-energy Bartels, M. 6/6/18 Americans Think Climate Change Should Be NASA's Top Priority, Not Sending Astronauts to Mars. Newsweek 6 June 2018 Accessed 24 Aug 2019 https://www.newsweek.com/americans-think-climate-change-should-be-nasas-top-priority-not-sending-963164 Cavicchioli, R et al. Scientists’ warning to humanity: microorganisms and climate change. Consensus Statement. 2019 Nature Reviews. CDC. 2016. National Centers for Health Statistics. Leading causes of death. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-death.htm Columbia Law School. Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. Accessed 8 Aug 2019 http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/resources/climate-change-laws-of-the-world-2/ Earls, M. Whistle-Blower Complaint Highlights CDC Turmoil on Climate. August 14, Scientific America. Accessed 27 Aug2019 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/whistle-blower-complaint-highlights-cdc-turmoil-on-climate/ Gibson, T. 2011 These Exercise Machines Turn Your Sweat Into Electricity. https://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/conservation/these-exercise-machines-turn-your-sweat-into-electricity Global Climate Change: Evidence. (2008 June 15). Accessed 1 July 2019, from http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers (2014) https://archive.ipcc.ch/index.htm Irfan, U. Fossil fuels are underpriced by a whopping $5.2 trillion. May 17, 2019. Accessed 8 Aug 2019 https://www.vox.com/2019/5/17/18624740/fossil-fuel-subsides-climate-imf Lamarche-Gagnon, G et al. 2019.Greenland melt drives continuous export of methane from the ice-sheet bed. Nature 565, 73–77. Naomi Imatome-Yun. 23 Feb 2016 Eric & Peety: A Story of Mutual Rescue. Forks Over Knives. https://www.forksoverknives.com/ericpeetymutualrescue/#gs.pr6xux NY Governor News. Governor Cuomo Announces Green New Deal Included in 2019 Executive Budget https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-green-new-deal-included-2019-executive-budget Pavegen. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCll2ZMEpr1Cz6lh606WD8YA https://pavegen.com/about/ Small Footprint Family. 2018. The time is now: 6 things we must do about climate change. https://www.smallfootprintfamily.com/what-we-can-do-about-climate-change Trevizo. P. Texas sues Exxon Mobil over environmental violations from Baytown fire. Accessed 6 Aug 2019. https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/State-sues-ExxonMobile-over-environmental-14284024.php United Nations. The Lazy Person’s Guide to Saving the World. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/takeaction/ WHO. 2018. Top 10 causes of death. Heart disease is the main cause of mortality in the US and globally. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death
University of Hawaii's Professor Maxine Burkett discusses climate change from a legal perspective in this timely conversation. What are some strategies that island nations like Kiribati can pursue? How can we work to protect climate migrants? And, as the UN General Assembly meets in New York, what should international organizations be doing?
University of Hawaii's Professor Maxine Burkett discusses climate change from a legal perspective in this timely conversation. What are some strategies that island nations like Kiribati can pursue? How can we work to protect climate migrants? And, as the UN General Assembly meets in New York, what should international organizations be doing?
Climate attribution science allows connections to be made between extreme weather events and a warming climate. The science is also being used to trace climate change to the activities of specific industries and companies, potentially generating evidence to fuel climate litigation.---A new scientific discipline, climate attribution science, is making connections between climate change and recent extreme weather events in the U.S. and around the globe. The science is emerging as a result of advances in computer power used to model weather and the climate, and as scientists have focused their efforts to understand the causes of increasingly frequent heat waves, droughts and flooding.Guests Peter Frumhoff, chief climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Michael Burger, executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University explore attribution science and the extent to which the cause and effect relationship between climate change and weather can in fact be understood. They also look at how attribution science can be used to trace the contribution to climate change of major greenhouse gas emitters, potentially creating new legal liability for industries and countries.Peter Frumhoff is chief climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Michael Burger is Executive Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.Related ContentBetting on Climate Solutions https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/paper/betting-climate-solutionsWhy Carbon Pricing Falls Short https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/policy-digests/why-carbon-pricing-falls-shortDon’t Let Climate Denial Distract Us https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/blog/2019/06/11/dont-let-climate-denial-distract-usThree Pathways to Uphold America’s Paris Commitment https://kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu/energy-policy-now/three-pathways-uphold-americas-paris-commitment
What are the legal pathways to reducing carbon emissions? On this episode of Columbia Energy Exchange, host Jason Bordoff is joined by Michael Gerrard, Founder and Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. Michael Gerrard is a professor of environmental law, climate change law, and energy regulation, and a member and former Chair of the Faculty of the Earth Institute at Columbia. He is the author and editor of more than a dozen books, two of which were named Best Law Book of the Year by the Association of American Publishers. His latest effort, “Legal Pathways to Decarbonization in the United States,” is an extensive policy encyclopedia that presents a menu of recommendations for policymakers, the legal community, and students to enable and accelerate decarbonization in the U.S. In a wide-ranging conversation, they discuss the playbook of legal options available to cut emissions and tackle the challenge of climate change - from fuel-switching to carbon capture, carbon pricing and identifying emission reduction pathways in trade and tax policy, they dissect policy recommendations for moving the U.S. toward a 2-degree pathway in order to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change.
Episode 24: Liza L. holds a BSc in Sustainability (now Earth, Energy, and Sustainability) from Leiden University College in The Hague (2015), and an LL.M. in Global Environmental and Climate Change Law from the University of Edinburgh. During LUC she was actively involved in the student community, and is currently the president of Evolucio - LUC's alumni association (http://www.evolucio.nl/). During and after studies she has undertaken three traineeships: one at an academic institute in The Hague, one at the European Commission, and a third at a consultancy firm. After all the studying and working in the field of climate change (https://www.aguanomics.com/2015/11/carbon-market-mechanisms-matter-for.html), she is about the begin a job at a Ministry of Environment in one of EU's Member States. This episode's motto: "Sometimes you wander into opportunity." "15 things I wish I'd known as a first year" on p 14 of this PAX: https://issuu.com/paxmagazineluc/docs/pax_issue_4 Project Drawdown (the most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse global warming): https://www.drawdown.org/ Weapons of Math Destruction: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28186015-weapons-of-math-destruction Related reviews: http://www.aguanomics.com/2017/02/weapons-of-math-destruction-review.html https://www.aguanomics.com/2018/03/review-future-crimes.html
Hear from Professor Liz Fisher (University of Oxford), as she makes the case for why 'hot' situations such as climate change needs 'hot' law, if Australia is to catch up with the rest of the world on governing and tackling climate change effectively. TIME STAMPS 0:00 - 9:08: Introduction by Professor Rosemary Lyster 9:13 - 46:10: Keynote lecture by Professor Liz Fisher 47:00 - 56:55: Reflection by Dr Kate Owens 57:03 - end: Concluding remarks by Rosemary Lyster This Sydney Ideas event was the University of Sydney on Tuesday 30 October 2018. https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/sydney-ideas/2018/governing-climate-change-hot-situations-need-hot-law.html
To kick-off Earth Week, CGEP and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law hosted a discussion with leading experts who presented and compared strategies for deep decarbonization in the United States by 2050. The panel included the following distinguished experts: Jeff Sachs, Director, Center for Sustainable Development, The Earth Institute; Karl Hausker, Senior Fellow, World Resources Institute; Geoff Heal, Donald C. Waite III Professor of Social Enterprise at Columbia Business School; Judi Greenwald, Principal, Greenwald Consulting; and Michael Gerrard, Director, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law.
The Center on Global Energy Policy and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law co-hosted a conversation with Fu Chengyu, former Chairman of China Petroleum and Chemical Corp (Sinopec) and CEO of China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC). Mr. Fu discussed China’s energy future, global oil markets and climate change. CGEP Inaugural Fellow David Sandalow moderated the discussion following Mr. Fu's opening remarks.
The Center on Global Energy Policy, the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and The Earth Institute of Columbia University hosted a conversation with physicist Amory Lovins, consultant to business and government leaders, cofounder and Chief Scientist of Rocky Mountain Institute.
On September 7th, the Center on Global Energy Policy hosted a panel discussion on the future of climate finance. Expert panelists included Billy Pizer, Professor in the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University and faculty fellow in the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Michael Gerrard, Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice at Columbia Law School, as well as Bruce Usher, Co-Director of the Tamer Center for Social Enterprise; Elizabeth B. Strickler '86 and Mark T. Gallogly '86 Faculty Director; Professor of Professional Practice. CGEP Inaugural Fellow David Sandalow moderated the discussion.
The Center on Global Energy Policy and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law organized a discussion on what comes next for the Paris COP21 Agreement after its adoption in December 2015. Our distinguished guests included: Dr. Scott Barrett, Lenfest-Earth Institute Professor of Natural Resource Economics, Columbia SIPA; Jason Bordoff, Founding Director, Center on Global Energy Policy; Michael Gerrard, Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice, Director, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia Law School; Nat Keohane, Vice President, Global Climate, Environmental Defense Fund; Kyung-Ah Park, Managing Director and Head of Environmental Markets Group, Goldman Sachs; and [Moderator] David Sandalow, Inaugural Fellow, Center on Global Energy Policy.
On March 1, 2015, a group of experts in international law, human rights law, environmental law, and other law adopted the Oslo Principles on Global Obligations to Reduce Climate Change. These experts came from national and international courts, universities and organizations located around the world. In part one of two podcasts on the Oslo Principles, Professor Myanna Dellinger interviews Michael Gerrard, Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice and Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in New York. Professor Gerrard is a world-renowned expert on environmental law and in particular climate change law. Part two will consist of an interview with Philip Sutherland, a professor at the Stellenbosch University Faculty of Law in South Africa who also contributed to the formulation of the Oslo Principles.
Professor Gerrard is the Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice at the Columbia Law School, where he is also Director of the Center for Climate Change Law.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
