David Adelman, Reorienting State Climate Change Policies to Induce Technological Change, 50 Ariz. L. Rev. 835 (2008) (with Kirsten H. Engel) –asserted that states can be instrumental in creating the technological advancements in controlling greenhouse gases; proposes a two-tiered strategy: primary federal responsibility for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while state policies focus on promoting technological developments and change
David Driesen, “Toward Sustainable Technology,” inEconomic Thought and U.S. Climate Change Policy (David Driesen, ed., MIT Press, 2009) –discussed the need for sustainable technology and how short-term economic benefits may not allow for the development of long-term technology, as well as proposing alternatives to regulations like the Kyoto Protocol
David Driesen, “Sustainable Development and Air Quality: The Need to Replace Basic Technologies with Cleaner Alternatives,” in Agenda for a Sustainable America (John Dernbach ed., Earth Island Press, 2009) –analyzed the US’s attempt to regulate air quality to keep up with the standards of Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration over the past five years, and determined that, while the US has improved air quality, it has not yet met the standards of the Rio Declaration and proposed ways in which the US could come closer to meeting the standards
David Driesen, “Renewable Energy under the Kyoto Protocol: The Case for Mixing Instruments,” in A Globally Integrated Climate Policy for Canada (Steven Bernstien et al. eds., University of Toronto Press, 2008) –proposed that a mixture of initiatives for both short-term economic benefits and long-term technological developments will be necessary for renewable energy source development
Kirsten Engel, Reorienting State Climate Change Policies to Induce Technological Change, 50 Ariz. L. Rev. 835 (2008) (with David E. Adelman) –asserted that states can be instrumental in creating the technological advancements in controlling greenhouse gases; proposes a two-tiered strategy: primary federal responsibility for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while state policies focus on promoting technological developments and change
Frank Ackerman: April 22, 2009 before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce hearing on Waxman-Markey on “The Costs of Inaction”
Robert Adler, “Rethinking Water Law in a Changing Climate,” in Global Warming: A Reader (William Rodgers, ed., Carolina Academic Press, 2009).
Robert Adler, Climate Change and the Hegemony of State Water Law, Stan. Envtl. L.J. (in progress, 2010).
Robert Adler, Resilience, Restoration and Sustainability: Revisiting Some (but not all) of the Fundamental Principles of the Clean Water Act, Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y (in progress, 2009)
William Buzbee, Waxman-Markey: Federalism Battles, CPRBlog, April 10, 2009, http://www.progressivereform.org/CPRBlog.cfm?idBlog=903A8A9A-1E0B-E803-CA7D01AC90F07AC0–discussed the issue of preservation of state regulation in the wake of Waxman-Markey, finding that areas of the bill take different approaches to the idea of preemption versus preservation, and despite the lack of preemption language, stakeholders will likely try to use preemption to prevent regulation
William Buzbee, “Climate bill good first step in long and arduous trip,” in Houston Chronicle, April 24, 2009 (with Victor B. Flatt) –op-ed describing the climate change bill discussion draft and its shortcomings, including lax standards for GHG emissions in the cap and trade system, the benefit of offsets and their potential environmental harm, continued state regulation and the need for clear language in their jurisdiction and environmental justice issues
Daniel Farber, The Misleading Economic Criticism of Waxman-Markey, CPRBlog, June 9, 2009, http://www.progressivereform.org/CPRBlog.cfm?idBlog=C5450C09-15C5-EA6D-3422732B380238C4–discussed the defense that climate change is too expensive to regulate and why this assumption is false, considering that almost all economic estimates for regulation have been too high before the regulation is enacted, and the potential benefits to humans and wildlife would much outweigh the costs
Bradley C. Karkkainen, The Peterson Compromises and the Question of, CPRBlog, June 26, 2009, http://www.progressivereform.org/CPRBlog.cfm?fkScholar=30–discussed the addition of provisions to Waxman-Markey that weakened the efforts of the bill by creating exemptions in the offset program for agriculture and forestry, and the difficulty of defining “additionality” under the new rules