<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/atom10full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0">
    <title>Ecology Law Currents</title>
    
    
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/" />
    <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:weblog-1840719</id>
    <updated>2012-02-15T23:11:26-08:00</updated>
    <subtitle>A publication of Ecology Law Quarterly</subtitle>
    <generator uri="http://www.typepad.com/">TypePad</generator>
    <atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/EcologyLawCurrents" /><feedburner:info uri="ecologylawcurrents" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://hubbub.api.typepad.com/" /><entry>
        <title>Aviation and Emissions Trading in the European Union: Pie in the Sky or Compatible with International Law?</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/Ezp-y2fCb9Q/currents39-01-switzer-2012-0209.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2012/02/currents39-01-switzer-2012-0209.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b016762126ecf970b</id>
        <published>2012-02-15T23:11:26-08:00</published>
        <updated>2012-02-15T23:10:09-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Stephanie Switzer* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] In 2003, the then European Community[1] adopted Directive 2003/87/EC, establishing a scheme for trading allowances of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.[2] Directive 2003/87/EC mandated the establishment of an emissions trading scheme (ETS) within the European Community “to promote reductions of greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-effective and economically efficient manner.”[3] The preamble to Directive 2003/87/EC states that the establishment of such a scheme would contribute to the achievement of the European Community’s and its Member States’ commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.[4] In this regard, the Protocol is a mechanism...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/Ezp-y2fCb9Q" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="International" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 39 (2012)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2012/02/currents39-01-switzer-2012-0209.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Seawater Desalination: Climate Change Adaptation Strategy or Contributor?</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/j4MqCaFPLhc/currents38-06-kelley-2011-1123.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/12/currents38-06-kelley-2011-1123.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2012-01-19T11:09:18-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0162fccc762a970d</id>
        <published>2011-12-04T19:46:42-08:00</published>
        <updated>2012-02-11T22:35:39-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Angela Haren Kelley* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] While droughts and water supply challenges have plagued California for decades, climate change will increase the strain on California’s water management system.[1] Seawater desalination—the process of removing salt and other minerals from seawater—is often hailed as the solution to the state’s water supply challenges.[2] However, proposals to build seawater desalination plants, which demand enormous quantities of energy, could be a shortsighted fix that will ultimately exacerbate climate change due to corresponding greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This article explores seawater desalination and alternative strategies for California to adapt...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/j4MqCaFPLhc" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Science &amp; Technology" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 38 (2011)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/12/currents38-06-kelley-2011-1123.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Clean Water Act Liability for Stormwater Discharge Regardless of Who Muddied the Waters</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/hjae4o4VIj8/currents38-05-welinder-2011-0719.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/07/currents38-05-welinder-2011-0719.html" thr:count="8" thr:updated="2011-11-10T09:17:59-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b01543316d0a0970c</id>
        <published>2011-07-19T10:13:50-07:00</published>
        <updated>2011-08-04T23:13:34-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Yana Welinder[*] [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Introduction Regulating pollution from stormwater that flows over structures and paved surfaces, collecting waste and sediments and ultimately spilling into rivers and oceans, can be a true “administrative nightmare.”[1] However, on March 10, 2011, the Ninth Circuit clarified that, when stormwater pollution cannot be attributed to any particular polluter, liability under the Clean Water Act (CWA)[2] can nevertheless be imposed upon the entity that controls the discharge of stormwater into watercourses.[3] As such, the court in Natural Resources Defense Council v. County of Los Angeles held the Los...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/hjae4o4VIj8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 38 (2011)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/07/currents38-05-welinder-2011-0719.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Acceptability of the Deschutes Groundwater Mitigation Program</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/ApVap_N2q6E/currents38-04-lieberherr-2011-0607.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/06/currents38-04-lieberherr-2011-0607.html" thr:count="2" thr:updated="2012-02-09T11:14:52-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b014e88aa9bbc970d</id>
        <published>2011-06-07T13:21:58-07:00</published>
        <updated>2011-06-10T14:21:01-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Eva Lieberherr* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] “We can’t create water or increase the supply. We can only hold back and redistribute what there is.”[1] In the last decade, the Deschutes River Basin in Central Oregon has faced growing urbanization, shifting water uses, and increasing ecosystem health concerns. This has led the Oregon Water Resources Department to experiment with a voluntary market-based approach to water management. To meet groundwater demands while maintaining instream flows and upholding prior water allocations, the Oregon Water Resources Department developed the Groundwater Mitigation Program in 2002. A program will be...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/ApVap_N2q6E" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 38 (2011)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/06/currents38-04-lieberherr-2011-0607.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>CERCLA’s Unrecoverable Natural Resource Damages:  Injuries to Cultural Resources and Services</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/DnbVTV5qL-0/currents38-03-peterman-2011-0301.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/03/currents38-03-peterman-2011-0301.html" thr:count="8" thr:updated="2011-11-08T14:56:38-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0147e2ec3cca970b</id>
        <published>2011-03-03T23:07:24-08:00</published>
        <updated>2011-03-09T11:05:20-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Sarah Peterman* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Introduction Confusion over what damages are recoverable as natural resource damages (NRD) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and other federal statutes abounds, giving credence to the oft-repeated phrase that “CERCLA is not a model of legislative clarity.”[1] Among other things, confusion appears in discussions among the Department of the Interior, legislators, and courts regarding the recoverability of cultural resource damages as NRD under CERCLA. But the statute and caselaw are clear. As demonstrated here, CERCLA establishes that injuries to cultural resources,[2]...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/DnbVTV5qL-0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Practitioner Tips" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 38 (2011)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/03/currents38-03-peterman-2011-0301.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>7th Annual EJ Symposium — Hungry for Justice: Growing an Equitable Food System</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/T-r9BOnDXq8/currents-ej-symposium-2011-0226.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/02/currents-ej-symposium-2011-0226.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2011-03-02T12:43:57-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0147e2d932e6970b</id>
        <published>2011-02-27T19:36:06-08:00</published>
        <updated>2011-02-27T19:53:47-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">[ Clck Here to Comment ] The Fight Against Hunger Through Progressive Food Stamp Policies Date: Monday, February 14, 2011, 12:45 pm Featuring: Aida Reyes, Maria Aceves, Wendy Limbert, and Joni Halpern (SPIN) Food: Cafe Gratitude Watch video of the event! Summary: Community activists from Supportive Parents Information Network (SPIN), a nonprofit organization from San Diego, spoke about the problem of hunger and how their activism has forced the local government to address fundamental problems in its administration of the food stamp program in San Diego County. This panel highlighted the voices of community members as they shared their struggles...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/T-r9BOnDXq8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Berkeley Law Symposia" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Environmental Justice" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Health" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="International" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        
        


        <link rel="enclosure" type="video/vnd.objectvideo" href="http://media.law.berkeley.edu/qtmedia/SEEJ/20110214_SEEJ.mp4" />
        <link rel="enclosure" type="video/vnd.objectvideo" href="http://media.law.berkeley.edu/qtmedia/SEEJ/20110215_SEEJ.mp4" />
        <link rel="enclosure" type="video/vnd.objectvideo" href="http://media.law.berkeley.edu/qtmedia/SEEJ/20110216_SEEJ.mp4" />
        <link rel="enclosure" type="video/vnd.objectvideo" href="http://media.law.berkeley.edu/qtmedia/SEEJ/20110217_SEEJ.mp4" />

    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/02/currents-ej-symposium-2011-0226.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>A National Injustice: The Federal Government’s Systematic Removal and Eradication of an American Icon</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/JgZfFvoqzis/currents38-02-wagmanmccurdy-2011-0215.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/02/currents38-02-wagmanmccurdy-2011-0215.html" thr:count="41" thr:updated="2012-01-10T01:23:32-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b014e5f3e963c970c</id>
        <published>2011-02-17T21:38:28-08:00</published>
        <updated>2011-02-18T16:15:29-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Bruce Wagman[*] &amp;amp; Lisa McCurdy[**] [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Brutal captures and deaths of American wild horses are occurring on the range. This is not a fictional western gone bad but federal policy. The government tries to justify this cruelty with junk science and is sheltered in its actions by procedural barriers and judicial deference. For nearly four decades, federal contractors have been capturing wild horses and burros across the western United States under the guise of “management” pursuant to the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act.[1] The horses are often chased down by...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/JgZfFvoqzis" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Animal Law" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Biodiversity" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 38 (2011)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/02/currents38-02-wagmanmccurdy-2011-0215.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Student Review of Selected Panels at the Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justice 2010 Symposium “Empowered Partnerships: Participatory Action Research for Environmental Justice”</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/sW8_h8Rqk8E/currents38-01-hendersonsymposium-2011-0118.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/01/currents38-01-hendersonsymposium-2011-0118.html" thr:count="4" thr:updated="2011-01-31T16:05:06-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0148c7c1ddd4970c</id>
        <published>2011-01-21T08:50:58-08:00</published>
        <updated>2011-01-21T09:12:49-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Anna Lund, Michelle Ben-David, and Ubaldo Fernandez* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] The following articles are student responses and observations of a selected few panels at Berkeley Law’s 2010 Symposium “Empowered Partnerships: Participatory Action Research for Environmental Justice” hosted by the Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justice and co-sponsored by Students for Economic and Environmental Justice at UC Berkeley School of Law; the Center on Race, Poverty &amp;amp; the Environment; Communities for a Better Environment; Asian Pacific Environmental Network; West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project; ¡PODER! - People Organizing to Demand Environmental &amp;amp; Economic Rights;...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/sW8_h8Rqk8E" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Berkeley Law Symposia" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Environmental Justice" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Health" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 38 (2011)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2011/01/currents38-01-hendersonsymposium-2011-0118.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>BP’s Well Evaded Environmental Review: Categorical Exclusion Policy Remains Unchanged</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/d9SDXgSFnc4/currents37-10-lopez-2010-1102.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/11/currents37-10-lopez-2010-1102.html" thr:count="6" thr:updated="2011-01-27T12:19:58-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b013488a9b4d6970c</id>
        <published>2010-11-03T21:45:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2011-02-28T21:03:48-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Jaclyn Lopez* [ Clck Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Introduction Sea snot, tar balls, and designated oiled carcass holding locations are just a few of the many appalling and lingering consequences of the failure of BP’s Macondo well in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico. The catastrophe began on April 20, 2010 when the well’s blowout preventer failed and caused a fiery explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon, the oil rig owned by Transocean and leased and operated by BP. The accident killed eleven rig workers and led to the largest oil spill in American history....&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/d9SDXgSFnc4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Science &amp; Technology" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/11/currents37-10-lopez-2010-1102.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Preliminary Injunctive Relief in the Ninth Circuit after Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/pqE3779RAKs/currents37-09-brown-2010-1012.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/10/currents37-09-brown-2010-1012.html" thr:count="7" thr:updated="2011-04-13T11:02:53-07:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b013488248085970c</id>
        <published>2010-10-12T13:29:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2011-02-06T13:28:05-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Susan Jane Brown* &amp;amp; Rachel Fazio** [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] &amp;gt;&amp;gt; Introduction On November 12, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling on Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council (Winter).[1] The Winter case originated in March of 2007[2] in the Central District of California when multiple environmental groups challenged the Navy’s issuance of an environmental assessment approving the use of mid-frequency active (MFA) sonar in exercises used to train strike teams (groups of surface ships, submarines, and aircraft) in antisubmarine warfare. Environmental groups sued pursuant to...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/pqE3779RAKs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Practitioner Tips" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/10/currents37-09-brown-2010-1012.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Promoting the Urban Homestead: Reform of Local Land Use Laws to Allow Microlivestock on Residential Lots</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/X7bre5lBPaQ/currents37-08-wood-2010-0907.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/09/currents37-08-wood-2010-0907.html" thr:count="10" thr:updated="2010-11-02T11:08:26-07:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0133f3f3d8b3970b</id>
        <published>2010-09-09T09:18:23-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-10-13T18:00:28-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Mary Wood, Jeremy Pyle, Naomi Rowden, &amp;amp; Katy Irwin* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Introduction Over the past several decades, Americans have divorced themselves from the ages-old endeavor of growing and harvesting their own food. During this era, the food system has undergone a radical change from its traditional makeup that predominated even just a few generations ago. Today, global distribution systems transport food thousands of miles before it reaches its final destination. While this model provides convenience and selection for consumers, the consolidation and centralization of food production has come at a high price....&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/X7bre5lBPaQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Animal Law" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/09/currents37-08-wood-2010-0907.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Whale of an Opportunity: Coast Guard Study of Los Angeles/Long Beach Port Access Routes Holds Great Potential for Reducing Ship Strikes within Santa Barbara Channel</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/QKqzqko2RA4/currents37-07-segee-2010-0816.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/08/currents37-07-segee-2010-0816.html" thr:count="3" thr:updated="2011-12-27T12:38:43-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0134863ef672970c</id>
        <published>2010-08-17T10:23:33-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-08-16T23:31:43-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Brian P. Segee* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Introduction As global whale populations slowly recover from historic hunting that brought numerous species to the brink of extinction, the increasing number of whales killed by collisions with ships threatens to slow or even reverse this recovery in some areas. Along the west coast of the United States, this conflict is most clearly evident in the Santa Barbara Channel, which not only provides essential habitat for numerous whales, including the densest seasonal population of blue whales on the planet, but also serves as the primary formal shipping...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/QKqzqko2RA4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Animal Law" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Biodiversity" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/08/currents37-07-segee-2010-0816.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Implementing SB 375: Promises and Pitfalls</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/jF61ea0jmDA/currents37-06-haney-2010-0606.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/06/currents37-06-haney-2010-0606.html" thr:count="4" thr:updated="2010-11-22T11:53:20-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b01348365b716970c</id>
        <published>2010-06-09T21:55:20-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-06-09T21:55:20-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Heather Haney* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Introduction On September 30, 2008, California passed the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, or SB 375. The legislation was the first in the country to link land use, transportation, and housing planning with global warming. The nation’s attention was once again focused on California’s efforts to address global climate change through innovative regulation.[1] Three years before, the legislature had passed The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, or AB 32, which requires the state to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels no later than 2020.[2]...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/jF61ea0jmDA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        
        


        <link rel="enclosure" type="application/octet-stream" href="http://www.ecovote.org/podcast/sb375-press-conf.m4v" />

    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/06/currents37-06-haney-2010-0606.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Lessons Already Learned: An Analysis of Waxman-Markey under Current WTO Case Law</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/N1ETua5BeNI/currents37-05-wannier-2010-0519.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/05/currents37-05-wannier-2010-0519.html" thr:count="3" thr:updated="2010-11-01T11:32:28-07:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0134812ebaff970c</id>
        <published>2010-05-19T15:27:34-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-05-31T18:17:13-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Gregory E. Wannier* [ Clck Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Introduction In 2009, the House of Representatives, responding to rising concerns over anthropogenic contributions to climate change, passed the first major piece of climate legislation in U.S. history.[1] This bill, the “American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009” (ACESA), would cap U.S. carbon emissions and establish a national carbon market where regulated parties trade carbon dioxide emissions rights.[2] However, because many in the developed world fear that carbon markets will hurt domestic industries and lead to job losses and “leakage” of carbon emissions to less-regulated markets...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/N1ETua5BeNI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="International" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/05/currents37-05-wannier-2010-0519.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Student Review of Selected Panels at the Berkeley Law 2010 Environmental Justice Symposium</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/2H7iMMjxbnU/currents37-04-ejsymposium-2010-0415.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/04/currents37-04-ejsymposium-2010-0415.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2010-07-27T15:49:34-07:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0133ecb749ab970b</id>
        <published>2010-04-24T20:31:50-07:00</published>
        <updated>2011-01-21T17:48:31-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Kara Cook, Maria Stamas, and Meredith Wilensky* [ Clck Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] The Role of the Environmental Justice Lawyer PANELISTS: Kara Brodfehrer, Attorney, California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc.; Alegria De La Cruz, Directing Attorney, Center on Race, Poverty, and the Environment; Helen Kang, Director, Golden Gate University, Environmental Law and Justice Clinic; Phoebe Seaton, Attorney, California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. The forum discussion on February 16, entitled “The Environmental Justice Movement: History &amp;amp; Skills Every Lawyer Should Know,” was a great kick off to the Sixth Annual Environmental Justice Symposium. For aspiring lawyers with very...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/2H7iMMjxbnU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Berkeley Law Symposia" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Environmental Justice" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Health" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="International" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/04/currents37-04-ejsymposium-2010-0415.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>A New Dawn for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta? Assessing the 2009 California Delta/Water Legislation</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/68OyYjHW-3I/currents37-03-frank-2010-0319.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/03/currents37-03-frank-2010-0319.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b01310fba3a6d970c</id>
        <published>2010-03-19T20:30:27-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-03-20T08:20:02-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Richard M. Frank* [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Introduction The California legislature’s major, substantive achievement of 2009 was the passage of a five-bill package designed to address the multiple ills that have befallen the California Delta[1] and compromised statewide water policy. The bills were signed into law with great fanfare by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger last November. This Article focuses on three related topics: (1) the legal, scientific and political developments that gave rise to this important and controversial legislation; (2) the key features of each of the five bills; and (3) the extent to...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/68OyYjHW-3I" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/03/currents37-03-frank-2010-0319.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Levine v. Vilsack: When “Likely” Actually Means “Definitely”</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/-4St0avlPII/currents37-1-wagman-2010-0307.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/03/currents37-1-wagman-2010-0307.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2011-12-21T02:23:03-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0120a91020eb970b</id>
        <published>2010-03-08T18:57:11-08:00</published>
        <updated>2010-03-09T16:17:02-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Bruce Wagman &amp;amp; Lisa McCurdy* [ Click Here to Comment! ] [ download PDF ] Sometimes procedural rulings allow courts to avoid important decisions that would otherwise make social and ethical declarations about the duality of American values with respect to animals. Stark evidence of that comes with the recent Ninth Circuit opinion in Levine v. Vilsack.[1] The Ninth Circuit ruled only that plaintiffs had no standing to sue because they did not meet the “redressability” requirement of standing under Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution.[2] With this holding, the opinion may signal a new hurdle for plaintiffs...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/-4St0avlPII" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Animal Law" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Health" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Practitioner Tips" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/03/currents37-1-wagman-2010-0307.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Avoiding Carbon Myopia: Three Considerations for Policy Makers Concerning Manmade Carbon Dioxide</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/cMiI0tdB5lo/currents37-0-soonlegates-2010-0226.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/02/currents37-0-soonlegates-2010-0226.html" thr:count="4" thr:updated="2010-04-06T15:06:26-07:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0128779ca3a3970c</id>
        <published>2010-02-28T00:23:47-08:00</published>
        <updated>2010-03-07T12:52:29-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Willie Soon* and David R. Legates** [ Click Here to Comment ] [ download PDF ] Towards a Global Carbon Regulatory Trading Scheme In December 2009, lawmakers and representatives from around the world, along with scientists, numerous journalists, and various celebrities flew to Copenhagen, Denmark. For the most part, their goal was to promote a regulatory scheme aimed at controlling human carbon emissions by declaring the element a tradable commodity and establishing laws and regulations to govern the trade. The proposed regulations were premised on the flawed notion, articulated by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),[1] that...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/cMiI0tdB5lo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 37 (2010)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2010/02/currents37-0-soonlegates-2010-0226.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Is It Really a Huge Mistake? Choosing Between Carbon Fees and Cap-and-Trade</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/1mZDGL5zFjY/c36-15-decastro-2009-1218.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/12/c36-15-decastro-2009-1218.html" thr:count="4" thr:updated="2010-11-03T11:50:22-07:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0120a7648397970b</id>
        <published>2009-12-28T07:18:04-08:00</published>
        <updated>2009-12-28T10:31:15-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">A Commentary on “The Huge Mistake – Climate Change Solutions 2009” Juan Arturo Iluminado C. de Castro* [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] In the video, “The Huge Mistake – Climate Change Solutions 2009,”[1] Laurie Williams and Allan Zabel (two highly experienced attorneys from the Environmental Protection Agency) appeal to both emotion and reason to convince viewers that the cap-and-trade program, embodied in the Waxman-Markey climate change bill,[2] is a huge mistake, and that carbon fees are the way to go. The authors posit that cap-and-trade proposed by the bill is a mistake because it is based...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/1mZDGL5zFjY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/12/c36-15-decastro-2009-1218.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Harnessing the Potential of the Clean Water Act to Address Ocean Acidification</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/y1ihizKErME/currents36-14-sakashita-2009-1205.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/12/currents36-14-sakashita-2009-1205.html" thr:count="5" thr:updated="2010-02-16T11:22:17-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0120a71a2809970b</id>
        <published>2009-12-05T18:34:05-08:00</published>
        <updated>2009-12-05T18:43:20-08:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Miyoko Sakashita* [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] In the halls of Congress and at the climate conference in Copenhagen, the question of how we can agree to reduce greenhouse gas pollution looms large. Under the sea’s surface, the question is whether the carbon dioxide (CO2) reductions will come soon enough. Each day the oceans absorb another 22 million tons of CO2 from the atmosphere, altering seawater chemistry and making it more acidic. Ocean acidification is rapidly advancing, with harmful consequences for marine life and ocean ecosystems on the horizon. Yet, ocean acidification has received far too...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/y1ihizKErME" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/12/currents36-14-sakashita-2009-1205.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Student Review of Selected Panels at the California State Bar’s 2009 Environmental Law Conference at Yosemite</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/dmaVs5OwqkM/currents36-13-yosemite-2009-1201.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/12/currents36-13-yosemite-2009-1201.html" thr:count="3" thr:updated="2010-03-02T14:58:13-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0120a6fa371a970b</id>
        <published>2009-12-01T17:41:17-08:00</published>
        <updated>2010-11-04T23:34:00-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Jessica Intrator, Lala Wu, Holly Wagenet, Sarah Barker-Ball, Camille Pannu, &amp;amp; Emily Jeffers* [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Weed in the Wild: Environmental Consequences of Marijuana Cultivation on Public Lands Speaker: Chief Ranger Steve Shackelton, Yosemite National Park Yosemite Chief Ranger Steve Shackelton has a lot on his plate. Together with only sixty rangers to cover Yosemite’s nearly 1200 square miles,[1] he oversees the safety of more than 3.5 million visitors annually.[2] Yet, an unprecedented problem threatens Chief Shackelton’s ability to meet his goals: illegal cultivation of marijuana within the park has recently turned his team...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/dmaVs5OwqkM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Biodiversity" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/12/currents36-13-yosemite-2009-1201.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Colorado, Centennial State at the Headwaters*</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/GemvWP5P6C0/currents36-11-hobbs-2009-0908.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/09/currents36-11-hobbs-2009-0908.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2010-02-10T14:36:24-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0120a557e5bd970b</id>
        <published>2009-09-08T21:33:22-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-09-08T21:35:21-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Justice Greg Hobbs, Colorado Supreme Court** [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Circumference We gather here to learn and celebrate, to greet dear friends and meet new ones, to recognize those among us who have gained our admiration for the circumference of their views and the bounty of their good-natured insight. In this treasured land of scarcity and opportunity, we seek the wealth of learning from each other the strength of understanding what we cannot know alone, to honor our differences, avoid rancor, bridge difficulties, welcome one another’s accomplishments. And when the prairie morning peeps into the...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/GemvWP5P6C0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/09/currents36-11-hobbs-2009-0908.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>A Framework for Energy Independence via Solar Hosting Farms</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/Y0j9ks285tE/currents36-10-marshall-2009-0726.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/08/currents36-10-marshall-2009-0726.html" thr:count="8" thr:updated="2012-02-02T17:07:17-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0115723976df970b</id>
        <published>2009-08-12T15:53:42-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-07-26T21:16:31-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Raymond Marshall* [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction Imagine for a moment that you live in an apartment building, rent commercial space in a shopping center, lease office space in a building, own a house in a densely wooded area, or manage a government agency in a building that does not receive much sunlight due to surrounding structures. Now imagine that you want to purchase solar panels and install them on your premises in order to have some degree of energy independence. The scenarios mentioned above are real-life examples of barriers that make it more difficult...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/Y0j9ks285tE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/08/currents36-10-marshall-2009-0726.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Fishing for Justice or Just Fishing?</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/TEyv44OT6_w/currents36-08-shilling-2009-0724.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/08/currents36-08-shilling-2009-0724.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2010-02-11T10:43:42-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b01157231ba3d970b</id>
        <published>2009-08-12T15:53:22-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-11-04T23:34:29-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Fraser M. Shilling* [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] California is not unique among states by virtue of having both a sizable urban fishing population and environmental pollution leading to fish contamination. Nor is it alone when it comes to having both highly diverse communities actively engaged in fishing and a political and social tradition of elitist decision making about both protecting fish populations and the people eating the fish. In many ways consumption of contaminated fish in California is an example of a confluence of contemporary social and ecological problems, for which there is no adequate...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/TEyv44OT6_w" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Environmental Justice" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Health" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/08/currents36-08-shilling-2009-0724.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Gray Wolves in the Northern Rockies Again Staring Down the Barrel at Hostile State Management</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/1f_fNk9tC-0/currents36-09-harbine-2009-0723.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/07/currents36-09-harbine-2009-0723.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0115713891ae970c</id>
        <published>2009-07-24T11:14:02-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-07-23T20:19:25-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Jenny K. Harbine* [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction Once abundant throughout the contiguous United States, gray wolves in the American West were brought to the brink of extinction by the 1930s through one of the most effective eradication campaigns in modern history. As a result, in 1974 gray wolves were protected under the Endangered Species Act[1] (ESA). Due to intensive conservation efforts that included wolf reintroduction to the greater Yellowstone and central Idaho areas, the current wolf population in the northern Rocky Mountains has rebounded to approximately 1650. However, extreme hostility toward wolves continues to...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/1f_fNk9tC-0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Biodiversity" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/07/currents36-09-harbine-2009-0723.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Food Justice and Food Retail in Los Angeles</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/Oj9tDYy_Dfo/currents36-05-vallianatos-2009-0625.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/06/currents36-05-vallianatos-2009-0625.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a0105372158ac970b0115706944dc970c</id>
        <published>2009-06-25T22:25:54-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-09-13T10:52:18-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Mark Vallianatos* [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] [ download Errata ] Food justice is the notion that everyone deserves healthy food and that the benefits and risks associated with food should be shared fairly. The concept borrows its distributional equity framework from the environmental justice movement, its focus on access to food from the community food security movement, and its interest in food environments from research in the public health and food systems fields.[1] Unfortunately, disparities in access and health mean that food justice is currently an aspiration rather than a reality in many low-income communities....&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/Oj9tDYy_Dfo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Environmental Justice" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Health" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/06/currents36-05-vallianatos-2009-0625.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Why 350? Climate Policy Must Aim to Stabilize Greenhouse Gases at the Level Necessary to Minimize the Risk of Catastrophic Outcomes</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/qoZUFGhF0fA/currents36-06-vespa.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/04/currents36-06-vespa.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65977173</id>
        <published>2009-04-24T09:32:21-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-09-13T10:50:35-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Matt Vespa * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] [ download Errata ] Introduction After years of inaction, the possibility of substantive federal and international climate policy is finally in sight. With so much time already squandered, insufficient action today will foreclose the ability to prevent catastrophe tomorrow. If we are to avoid saddling future generations with extreme economic and environmental hardships, emerging climate policy must ensure a high probability of keeping future warming below dangerous levels. Unfortunately, proposed federal climate legislation, which aims at limiting temperature rise to 2–3°C above pre-industrial levels by stabilizing greenhouse gases...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/qoZUFGhF0fA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/04/currents36-06-vespa.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Spreading the Water Wealth: Making Water Infrastructure Work for the Poor*</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/m1545r0qTTw/c36-05-mccully.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/04/c36-05-mccully.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2010-02-10T11:02:36-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65887223</id>
        <published>2009-04-22T11:11:51-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-04-24T19:48:38-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Patrick McCully and Lori Pottinger ** [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Want of clean water, decent sanitation, and adequate food and energy strips people of their dignity and their most basic rights. Inequitable access to water, especially for growing crops, is a major factor in global poverty and a death sentence for millions each year. According to the World Bank, “[t]he ‘easy and cheap’ options for mobilizing water resources for human needs have mostly been exploited.”[1] If the World Bank were right, this would be a depressing message for the 1.1 billion people without easy access...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/m1545r0qTTw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Environmental Justice" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="International" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/04/c36-05-mccully.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>An Argument For Placing Logging Roads Under the NPDES Program</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/04ijipZ1vnE/currents36-04-boston-2009-0310.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/03/currents36-04-boston-2009-0310.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65829557</id>
        <published>2009-03-10T16:30:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-06T16:32:35-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Kevin Boston &amp;amp; Matt Thompson * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction Recent judicial decisions addressing the impact of forest management on water quality suggest that EPA’s clarification of regulations under the Clean Water Act (CWA) may become increasingly important. Courts currently must decide whether water pollution from forest roads and their drainage systems meets the criteria for point source pollution, rendering such sources subject to National Pollution Elimination Discharge System (NPDES) permit requirements under the CWA. Two federal district courts recently reached conflicting decisions regarding this very issue. In Environmental Protection Information Center v. Pacific...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/04ijipZ1vnE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Forestry" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/03/currents36-04-boston-2009-0310.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Restoring Public Trust in the Public Lands: An Agenda for the New Administration</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/E4m5e662DOY/currents36-03-biber-2009-0127.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/01/currents36-03-biber-2009-0127.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65830257</id>
        <published>2009-01-27T16:58:00-08:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-06T16:36:03-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Eric Biber, Holly Doremus, Dan Farber, Rick Frank, and Joseph Sax * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Federally-owned and managed public lands occupy approximately thirty percent of the land area of the United States, and anywhere from forty-five percent to over eighty percent of the land area of many of the states of the West, including California.[1] Those federal lands are significant sources of economically important natural resources for the United States, including timber, rangeland, and minerals. In particular, they are an important source of energy resources for the United States, both fossil fuel (oil, natural...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/E4m5e662DOY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/01/currents36-03-biber-2009-0127.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>A Challenge for the Obama Team: Put Science and Federal Scientists to Better Use</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/DLk_V1oyHSE/currents36-02-doremus-2009-0122.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/01/currents36-02-doremus-2009-0122.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65932667</id>
        <published>2009-01-22T09:15:00-08:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-06T16:38:41-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Holly Doremus * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction It’s no secret that the outgoing George W. Bush administration has been hostile to environmental interests. By all accounts the Obama administration will be different on that score (as on many others). Before it can concentrate on its own new environmental priorities, though, the new administration will have to root out the counterproductive work of its predecessor. To some extent that’s just politics as usual and expected. Some degree of “policy whiplash” legitimately accompanies every presidential transition. But this transition will be more complicated than usual. As...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/DLk_V1oyHSE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Science &amp; Technology" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/01/currents36-02-doremus-2009-0122.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Stopping the Conversation: Amended ESA Section 7 Regulations Put Species At Risk</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/Sz31C6Ui7kY/currents36-01-biber-2009-0122.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/01/currents36-01-biber-2009-0122.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65936835</id>
        <published>2009-01-22T08:52:00-08:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-06T16:41:13-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Eric Biber and Cynthia Drew * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the primary legal tool in the United States for the protection of biodiversity. Since its enactment in 1973, it has played a central role in efforts to halt the decline of native species throughout the country. Central to the ESA’s regulatory structure is Section 7 of the Act, which requires federal agencies to consult with federal wildlife agencies to insure that their actions do not “jeopardize” the existence of species listed for protection under the Act, or “adversely modify”...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/Sz31C6Ui7kY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Biodiversity" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 36 (2009)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2009/01/currents36-01-biber-2009-0122.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>The First One Hundred Days: Ten Things President-Elect Obama Should Do to Confront the Climate Crisis</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/Zu35tHComA8/currents35-18-parenteau-2008-1221.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/12/currents35-18-parenteau-2008-1221.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65983081</id>
        <published>2008-12-21T11:16:00-08:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-06T16:08:40-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Patrick Parenteau * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] In a recent speech, former Vice President and Nobel laureate Al Gore challenged the nation to produce 100 percent of its electricity from non-carbon sources within ten years.[1] Linking the issues of climate, energy, economy and national security, Mr. Gore stated: “We’re borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet. Every bit of that’s got to change.” Critics immediately dismissed the idea as wacky, given the fact that the nation currently gets less than 10 percent...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/Zu35tHComA8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Biodiversity" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/12/currents35-18-parenteau-2008-1221.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Trains Deliver the Goods</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/V65j-38DOEQ/currents35-17-landman-2008-1208.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/12/currents35-17-landman-2008-1208.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65986011</id>
        <published>2008-12-08T12:34:00-08:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-06T16:10:28-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Lawrence B. Landman * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Trucks Pollute, Trains Don’t Trains carry goods 94 percent more efficiently than do trucks. California should therefore encourage firms to ship goods on trains, not trucks. Yet the California Air Resources Board (CARB), in its draft Scoping Plan, ignores the huge gains the state could enjoy if it simply used more trains.[1] A new high-speed train will, hopefully soon, connect Northern and Southern California. The Scoping Plan does recognize that voters may agree to invest approximately $10 billion to build this modern rail line, as they indeed...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/V65j-38DOEQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/12/currents35-17-landman-2008-1208.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Land Use and Climate Change: Is it Time for a National Land Use Policy?</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/GmllnzuEY2U/currents35-16-lacroix-2008-1124.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/11/currents35-16-lacroix-2008-1124.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-65987297</id>
        <published>2008-11-24T13:04:00-08:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-06T16:13:32-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Catherine J. LaCroix * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] The immediate and short answer to the question in the title is no. It will never be time for an articulated federal land use policy; the tradition of local control of land use is simply too strong. But consider, for a moment, what this local control policy has produced: a legacy of massive, auto-dependent suburban sprawl nationwide. When we consider that more than one-third of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States come from transportation[1] and that land use patterns perpetuate auto-dependency,[2] we may find that it...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/GmllnzuEY2U" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/11/currents35-16-lacroix-2008-1124.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>China's Environment After the Olympics</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/FWRSSZGaV20/currents35-13-ping-2008-1030.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/10/currents35-13-ping-2008-1030.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2010-02-10T11:02:56-08:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66359015</id>
        <published>2008-10-30T12:13:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-11-04T23:36:28-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Lo Sze Ping * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] I. Introduction China’s economy is the fastest growing in the world. Official Chinese government figures, from the National Bureau of Statistics, indicate that China’s economy grew 11.9 percent in 2007, the fastest rate of growth in more than a decade.[1] However, nearly thirty years of rapid economic growth coupled with a “pollute first, clean up later” mentality has devastated China’s environment. As a nation of over 1.3 billion people, China faces some of the world’s greatest environmental challenges. Some 400 cities in China face severe water shortages,[2]...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/FWRSSZGaV20" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="International" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/10/currents35-13-ping-2008-1030.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Building Energy Efficiency in China</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/i-OFB_X1aeQ/currents35-14-jin-2008-1030.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/10/currents35-14-jin-2008-1030.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66360585</id>
        <published>2008-10-30T12:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-05T14:52:05-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Ruidong Jin and Fan Rui * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] I. Yesterday: Was Building Energy Efficiency Needed in China? This was the question asked by Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) when we first entered China early in 1998. To our surprise, we found few people interested in energy efficient buildings. In contrast with the aggressive energy standards for buildings in the United States, few Chinese provisions expressly pertained to energy efficiency in its numerous building codes and standards. At that time, the whole country had only one national building standard dealing with energy savings, which...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/i-OFB_X1aeQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="International" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/10/currents35-14-jin-2008-1030.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Enhancing China’s Environmental Governance: Challenges and Opportunities</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/kDjGeAo1KwA/currents35-15-yang-2008-1030.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/10/currents35-15-yang-2008-1030.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66361273</id>
        <published>2008-10-30T10:30:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-05T14:51:34-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Fuqiang Yang and Min Hu * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction China’s economic and social development has had severe environmental impacts: from land and water resource deterioration to becoming the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, pollution has resulted in total losses equivalent to 3.05 percent of China’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).[1] Under a strategic plan to pursue a sustainable development path, China has passed a plethora of environmental laws, standards, and regulations in recent years, and adopted ambitious targets aiming at reducing major pollutants by ten percent and improving GDP energy efficiency by twenty percent...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/kDjGeAo1KwA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="International" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/10/currents35-15-yang-2008-1030.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>California &amp; the Future of Environmental Law &amp; Policy</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/yOLkOMpPUn8/currents35-09-frank-2008-0915.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/09/currents35-09-frank-2008-0915.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66511903</id>
        <published>2008-09-15T15:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-07T13:18:29-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Richard M. Frank * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Earlier this year, the U.C. Berkeley School of Law’s California Center for Environmental Law &amp;amp; Policy (CCELP) sponsored and hosted a major conference, “California &amp;amp; the Future of Environmental Law &amp;amp; Policy.”[1] The purpose of this successful event, which brought together government policymakers, practicing attorneys, scholars and students, was to explore California’s leadership role—regionally, nationally and globally—in formulating and implementing effective environmental policy. The CCELP conference focused on the most critical environmental challenges facing California, the United States and the international community. Panels of experts debated issues...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/yOLkOMpPUn8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/09/currents35-09-frank-2008-0915.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Can California’s Water Problems Be Solved?</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/de1rhLtM_3U/currents35-10-gleick-2008-0915.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/09/currents35-10-gleick-2008-0915.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66511033</id>
        <published>2008-09-15T14:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-07T12:58:28-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Peter H. Gleick * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction The title of the speech is from a presentation titled “Can California’s Water Problems Be Solved?” but, in retrospect, this rhetorical question seems a bit ridiculous.[1] Of course California’s water problems can be solved. The important questions to ask here are not about the possibility of finding a solution, but rather the probability of and strategy by which to do so: a more accurate title may have been “Will California’s Water Problems be Solved?” or “How to Solve California’s Water Problems” or “Does California Have a...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/de1rhLtM_3U" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/09/currents35-10-gleick-2008-0915.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Global Warming Tort Litigation: The Real “Public Nuisance”</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/M7Oe_qzc5Sg/currents35-11-boutrous-2008-0915.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/09/currents35-11-boutrous-2008-0915.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66510131</id>
        <published>2008-09-15T13:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-05T14:49:31-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr. and Dominic Lanza * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Climate change litigation is booming. The past five years have witnessed a proliferation of global warming lawsuits brought under an array of novel legal theories. This article focuses on the subset of global warming cases involving “public nuisance” claims. In those cases, various plaintiffs (including state governments, environmental groups, Mississippi landowners, New Yorkers, and Alaskan villagers) have brought tort claims against members of the oil, automobile, and electric utility industries under the theory that the targeted defendants’ carbon dioxide (“CO2”) emissions contribute to...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/M7Oe_qzc5Sg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/09/currents35-11-boutrous-2008-0915.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Integrating Land Use and Transportation Policy in California: The Legislature's Response</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/9xUi1VtZCVk/currents35-12-jones-2008-0915.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/09/currents35-12-jones-2008-0915.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-66507219</id>
        <published>2008-09-15T12:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-05T14:48:52-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Dave Jones * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] The Challenge Accelerated climate change is the preeminent environmental and economic issue of our time. Unless we change course now, it will be the preeminent issue for the next generations also. Recognizing the situation, the Legislature passed Assembly Bill 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.[1] This law put California at the forefront of taking action to combat global warming by establishing aggressive goals for reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The goal of AB 32 is to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/9xUi1VtZCVk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Land Management" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/09/currents35-12-jones-2008-0915.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Introduction</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/k8rB_EZIavg/currents35-01-chamberlain-2008-0411.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-01-chamberlain-2008-0411.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67090945</id>
        <published>2008-04-11T19:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-20T21:13:25-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">William M. Chamberlain * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Once again, Boalt Hall’s Ecology Law Quarterly is breaking new ground in the provision of timely and useful legal analysis on environmental topics. We are pleased to introduce Ecology Law Currents, an online journal that will provide the opportunity to see the views of several authors on topics of current interest. This first issue, exploring the important question whether nuclear power can and should be part of the solution to climate stabilization, allows ELQ to provide a variety of views without requiring the many months that normal...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/k8rB_EZIavg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-01-chamberlain-2008-0411.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Licensing the Rebirth of Nuclear Power: A Primer</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/cihxwmxNahE/currents35-02-smith-2008-0411.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-02-smith-2008-0411.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67090529</id>
        <published>2008-04-11T18:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-11-04T23:37:45-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Tyson Smith * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction In 2007, the nuclear industry took the first steps toward a second generation of nuclear construction in the United States. Starting with a partial application in July 2007 for a new unit in Maryland, and followed by complete applications for multiple new units in Alabama, Virginia, Texas, and South Carolina in late 2007, new reactor licensing is now underway.[1] These applications are the first received by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”) in nearly 30 years.[2] In some ways it may be helpful to discard older methodologies,...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/cihxwmxNahE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-02-smith-2008-0411.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Resolving the Spent Fuel Issue for New Nuclear Power Plants</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/LHrKzisPyEs/currents35-03-bosselman-2008-0411.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-03-bosselman-2008-0411.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67090023</id>
        <published>2008-04-11T17:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-05-20T20:49:36-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Fred Bosselman * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] In the United States, opponents of new nuclear power plants argue that no new plants should be built until we are prepared to bury the spent fuel from power plants in a permanent storage facility.[1] In my opinion, it is unnecessary to resolve this issue before building new nuclear power plants. New plants can use dry cask storage as a safe and secure method of handling spent fuel for the next fifty years or more.[2] When the fuel used in nuclear power plants loses enough of its potency,...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/LHrKzisPyEs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-03-bosselman-2008-0411.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>The Externalities of Nuclear Power:First, Assume We Have a Can Opener . . .</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/JqmQv5VDikQ/currents35-04-coplan-2008-0411.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-04-coplan-2008-0411.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67060515</id>
        <published>2008-04-11T16:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-11-04T23:38:52-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Karl S. Coplan * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction The nuclear power industry has latched on to global warming as an argument for its renaissance. Although even industry proponents acknowledge that the problem of disposing of spent nuclear fuel remains unsolved, the industry routinely assumes this problem will be solved in the future. Unfortunately, this is the same assumption made by nuclear energy proponents at the beginning of the nuclear industry fifty years ago. We haven’t solved the nuclear waste problem in the past half century, and there is no reason to think we will...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/JqmQv5VDikQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-04-coplan-2008-0411.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Relative Risk: Global Warming and Imported Fossil Fuels vs. Nuclear Power</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/5AiPCxAEa6A/currents35-05-devore-2008-0411.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-05-devore-2008-0411.html" thr:count="5" thr:updated="2010-06-18T13:47:46-07:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67059945</id>
        <published>2008-04-11T15:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-11-04T23:39:29-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">California State Assemblyman Chuck DeVore * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Understanding relative risk is at the heart of America’s current debate over a revival of nuclear power. “Nuclear power is dangerous,” say the critics. “Dangerous compared to what?” should be the reply. Commenting in early 2007, the president of Stanford University, John Hennessy, said, “Nuclear power has to be part of the solution [to global warming]. Can we really understand the notion of risk? Nuclear plants versus carbon emissions – which will kill and has killed more people?”[1] To this we should append a question...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/5AiPCxAEa6A" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-05-devore-2008-0411.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Greenhouse Gas Emissions under CEQA  Costs and Opportunities</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/kjeBHg6oDFo/currents35-06-allen-2008-0411.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-06-allen-2008-0411.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67059121</id>
        <published>2008-04-11T14:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2009-06-05T14:46:17-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Peter V. Allen * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] The recent enactment of SB 97[1] has codified the California Attorney General’s argument that increased greenhouse gas emissions and their effects constitute an environmental impact that must be considered by a permitting agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This new measure will make many CEQA reviews more complex, and will require more costly mitigation measures for many projects, but it also provides some potential opportunities, particularly for renewable energy developers. This Article looks at the implementation of SB 97 and some of its possible ramifications....&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/kjeBHg6oDFo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="California" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Climate Change" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Policy &amp; Politics" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-06-allen-2008-0411.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Would it be Unethical to Dump Radioactive Wastes in the Ocean?       The Surprising Implications of the Person-Altering Consequences of Policies</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/6mQ1yhKKCnA/currents35-07-crespi-2008-0411.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-07-crespi-2008-0411.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67035097</id>
        <published>2008-04-11T13:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-11-04T23:40:11-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Gregory Scott Crespi * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] Introduction Should we put all of our high-level radioactive wastes into ordinary steel barrels that have perhaps 200-year expected containment capabilities in salt water, and then dump them all into the depths of the Pacific Ocean and forget about them? Such a policy would free the billions of dollars spent annually on radioactive waste storage for other pressing social needs. Despite these benefits, however, most would regard such a radically present-oriented policy as an egregious violation of our ethical obligations to distant future generations. There is broad...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/6mQ1yhKKCnA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Water" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-07-crespi-2008-0411.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Myths of the Nuclear Renaissance</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~3/RoglKZu4bKE/currents35-08-harding-2008-0411.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-08-harding-2008-0411.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-67032599</id>
        <published>2008-04-11T12:00:00-07:00</published>
        <updated>2010-11-04T23:40:37-07:00</updated>
        <summary type="html">Jim Harding * [ jump to end/comments ] [ download PDF ] More than thirty years ago, my now-deceased colleague David Comey was asked to make a presentation before the annual meeting of the Atomic Industrial Forum, then the major trade association backing expansion of nuclear power worldwide.[1] He was asked to deliver that speech because he had built credibility with the press and with key decision makers by being scrupulously careful with his facts and analyses. The industry understood that its reputation—particularly with the media—was poor, and they wanted to understand how David did it. In Comey’s view, there...&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EcologyLawCurrents/~4/RoglKZu4bKE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</summary>
        <author>
            <name>ELQ Journal</name>
        </author>
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Energy" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Volume 35 (2008)" />
        <category scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" term="Waste &amp; Pollution" />
        
        



    <feedburner:origLink>http://elq.typepad.com/currents/2008/04/currents35-08-harding-2008-0411.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
 
</feed><!-- ph=1 -->

