Biofuels: Potentials, Problems & Solutions

Biofuels have the exciting potential of mitigating the grave threats of global warming, reducing the world\u27s dependence on imported oil from insecure sources and of reducing the skyrocketing costs of oil that are threatening to undermine the world\u27s economies and devastating the people in non-oil producing, developing countries. For the people in these countries, biofuel offer a promising road to enhance development since they use local materials, can provide local jobs, and do not require the import of expensive equipment and expertise. Brazil has been the pioneer in the use of biofuel, allowing it to eliminate its oil imports, becoming completely energy independent, and demonstrating to the world the potential benefits of substitution of biofuels for fossil fuels. Indeed, inspired by Brazil\u27s example, the United States in recent years has developed a strong biofuel industry, albeit from the disadvantageous feedstock of corn. The United States has just created an alliance with Brazil to make major purchases of its biofuels. The European Union and countries around the world are rapidly developing their own biofuel potentials. But Brazil and its replicators have to exercise great care in designing and implementing biofuel programs. The environmental and social risks of biofuel development, also demonstrated in Brazil, are great and could well undermine all of the potential advantages if not done right

Strengthening of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act in 1984: The Original Loopholes, the Amendments, and the Political Factors Behind Their Passage

This commentary discusses the nature of the legal loopholes that existed in the original RCRA statute, and highlights several of the provisions of the 1984 RCRA amendments that serve to either rectify or ameliorate the prior deficiencies. It also examines the political factors that affected the passage of the 1984 amendments, enabling them to pass during a period of anti-regulatory emphasis

Energy-Efficiency: The Best Option for a Secure, Clean, Healthy Future

The risks of dependence on traditional fuels have never been greater or more obvious. Modern civilization and the world economy are facing imminent and clear threats of worldwide terrorism. The oil producing countries of the Middle East are increasingly unstable, confronting the world with potentially calamitous energy and economic disruptions. Domestically, our limited refining capacity creates shortages when demand is high and increases prices even when petroleum supplies are plentiful. Yet most of the world is in a state of denial, happy to bask in the illusory security of temporary Saudi oil production increases. Moreover, these new dangers sit on top of the imperatives of addressing the formidable consequences of global warming and pollution that emanate from use of these traditional fuels

Energy Efficiency: The Best Immediate Option for a Secure, Clean, Healthy Future

The imperatives for reducing the world’s dependence on fossil and nuclear fuels have multiplied manifold in recent years with the advent of worldwide terrorism. These new dangers come in addition to the imperatives of addressing the dire consequences of global warming and devastating pollution that accompany the use of these fossil fuels. Reducing dependence on these unsafe and unreliable energy resources should be a top global priority. Implementation of proven energy efficiency technologies offers the world the fastest, safest, most economic and most environmentally benign way to alleviate these threats. This article outlines available efficiency measures, their economic advantages and means by which they may be and have been implemented. While examples of efficiency applications from both developed and developing countries are given, the article relies heavily on experience with energy efficiency in the United States, where data on efficiency is particularly abundant

Global Climate Change Kyoto Protocol Implementation: Legal Frameworks for Implementing Clean Energy Solutions

This paper describes the measures that have been and can be taken and the legal mechanisms by which successes have been achieved in reducing greenhouse gases. Examples are given of success stories from around the world, but these examples are just demonstrative. Many hundreds of programs have been pursued successfully around the world in both industrial and developing countries. What does emerge, however, is clear evidence that global warming can be effectively addressed and that many significant steps have been taken profitably in both the public and private sectors, offering significant business, export and job opportunities, and that much can be done by accessing internal resources. To meet the challenges of the Kyoto Protocols and the IPCC estimates of what needs to be done, however, much more extensive and resolute changes must be taken by both governments and corporations, with much greater financing of the upfront costs by them and by multilateral institutions

Welcome (Symposium on Framework Laws--The Key to Sustainable Development in the Americas)

This is a subject of deep interest to our law school. We have established one of the top environmental studies centers in the United States. In addition, we operate a nationally recognized energy law project, land use law center and international commercial law institute. Our interest is global and broad, focusing on the legal issues involved both in resource use and conservation and on applications at the local, national and international level. We take this broad approach for a simple reason: it is the approach that our graduates will have to take as they practice law in the global market and environment. For these reasons, I am pleased that Professor Nolon is continuing to discuss with FARN how our collaboration can continue and become even more productive

Legislation and the Environment: Individual Rights and Government Accountability

Recent public concern with the pollution threat has generated a rash of suggested solutions. Within the past year councils, agencies, advisory commissions, and billion-dollar programs have been urged upon us. Reorganizations and reorderings of priorities have been called for. The question remains, however, whether this welter of proposals squarely attacks the real problem-the fact that all of our institutions are rooted in the notions of inexhaustible supply and limitless ability to repair. The answer can be found only by examining specific conflicts between technology and environment and analyzing the way our institutions attempt to resolve them

The Case for State Pollution Taxes

Pollution taxes are a sound environmental instrument. The principal means of controlling pollution in the United States is by command and control regulation, setting standards or limits on emissions and requiring particular pollution control technologies. Command and control regulation of pollution, while necessary to assure pollution reductions, has its limits. While much more certain of reducing pollution than pollution taxes would be, controls tend to be set only at levels that are politically acceptable. Seldom are the full social costs of pollution eliminated in pollution control standards, except where particularly noxious products are banned outright, such as the prohibitions against use of asbestos, DDT and lead in gasoline in the United States. Furthermore, when standards are adopted, there is no incentive provided for emitters to exceed those standards or to develop better pollution control technologies