Marten Law Group: States, Courts Drive Climate Change Policy While Federal Government Sits on Sidelines


While federal lawmakers continue to debate climate change policy, states, local governments, and court cases have moved forward. In this Emerging Issues Commentary, Michael G. Lufkin of the Marten Law Group reviews the most important recent regional, state, and local laws and regulations, as well as the most significant judicial developments driving climate change policy across the country. Mr. Lufkin writes:

 

Seventeen states have now adopted economy-wide greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets, with seven of these having done so since January 1, 2007. (footnote omitted) In the last three months alone, Oregon, Florida, New Jersey and Hawaii have either legislatively or by executive order adopted GHG reduction targets. (footnote omitted) These states now face the difficult task of developing policies to achieve the aggressive emission reduction goals they have announced. With the exception of California , most states have created special commissions or task forces to recommend policies to meet the targeted goals. For example, the Oregon law setting the reduction targets also created the Oregon Global Warming Commission to recommend to state and local governments ways to reduce GHG emissions and measures the state may adopt to mite-gate the impacts of global warming. (footnote omitted) Likewise, Florida Governor Charlie Crist appointed stakeholders to a “Governor’s Action Team on Energy and Climate Change.” Members of the action team are charged with identifying strategies to reduce emissions, including recommendations for proposed legislation for consideration during the 2008 legislative session and beyond. (footnote omitted) 

 

Subscribers can access the complete commentary on lexis.com. Additional fees may be incurred. (approx. 15 pages)
 
Non-subscribers may purchase the complete commentary on LexisNexis Store.

Comments

Michael G Lufkin
  • 12-06-2007

<BR>Thanks for the post.  Which carbon-control states do you think are at the greatest risk of experiencing economic disadvantage?