Author: vjel

Despite their crowded streets

The Beacon Blog: Consider It Briefed

Tackling Food Insecurity in Urban Food Deserts: A Legal Toolkit

By Colleen McGrath, Juris Doctor Candidate (VLGS ’23) and Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

April 10, 2022

Despite their crowded streets, the Bronx, Brooklyn, Newark, Chicago, and other large urban communities are often considered food deserts. Food deserts are regions of food insecurity where healthy, fresh groceries are virtually inaccessible. Food deserts are typically marked by low income, lack of access to adequate public transportation, or simply lack of choice in the area. Food insecurity already impacted nearly 11% of Americans in 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic hit. Statistics also showed that food deserts disproportionately impacted communities of color during the same period. In 2019, about 8.1% of white individuals experienced food insecurity in their communities. In comparison, Latino individuals experienced food insecurity at a rate of 15.8% Black individuals at 19.3%, and Indigenous individuals at 23.5%. By the end of 2020, Black households were experiencing food insecurity at a rate of 21.7% and Latino households at a rate of 17.2%. On the other hand, white households reported experiencing food insecurity at a rate of just over 7%. Researchers have observed that “food insecurity is experienced in greater proportion by these racial and ethnic groups due to a number of factors — a key one being structural racism.” Delays, supply chain problems, and limited labor have also led to problems in quality control, making nutritious options that much tougher to come by on a regular basis. So how can communities take on food insecurity made worse by the onset of COVID-19 without the help of chain grocery stores?

Zoning Laws

A potential solution to food insecurity in urban spaces that is gaining some attention is amending zoning laws and regulations to make local agriculture more accessible. Zoning ordinances can be confusing, and often mention terms that do not have a clear vernacular equivalent. Towns can amend zoning ordinances and regulations to use clearer terminology that explicitly authorizes urban agricultural uses. This change can bring fresh fruits and vegetables to the community, from the community. Similar changes might include language that explicitly allows farmers markets and produce vendors to set up stands in public spaces, or language that allows for larger-scale agricultural projects in community gardens.

The Healthy Food Policy Project created guidelines to assist communities in drafting definition sections of zoning laws to make them clearer and easier to understand in order to increase access to healthful foods in areas impacted by food insecurity. The guidelines suggest drafting strategies to simplify interpreting zoning requirements, like including examples of permitted practices or burying the meaning of a word in the operative language instead of separating the term and its definition. These changes make it easier for communities to understand and comply with zoning laws while bringing gardens and urban agricultural centers to the community with greater confidence.

Subsidize Healthier Choices and Incentivize Eating Well

Another study suggests that two-thirds of households using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits bought a greater variety of healthy fruits and vegetables while testing an incentive program aimed at eliminating food insecurity. During a test run of the Healthy Incentive Pilot (HIP), the USDA offered participants who used SNAP benefits an incentive of 30 cents per dollar spent on targeted fresh fruits and vegetables. Researchers reported inspiring results, households increased SNAP spending on fresh fruits and vegetables by an average of 11% which led to an increased Healthy Eating Index rating, ranging from 57/100 to 62/100. Perhaps most importantly, 75% of households felt healthy fruits and vegetables were more accessible and affordable as a result of the HIP incentive. One of the greatest challenges of increasing food security is encouraging communities to regularly purchase and seek out healthy foods in their own neighborhoods. Incentives like those tested here would certainly get many households on the right path.

 

Incentive programs have the potential to impact food insecurity much faster than other options. Programs like HIP immediately give families more money to spend on healthful foods and make fruits and vegetables affordable. An incentive or subsidy program could also be implemented without the cooperation or contribution from grocery stores themselves if suppliers of healthier foods are reluctant to open a location in a food desert. By handling the issue from an economic standpoint, households would still pay the same price to vendors or stores, but with help with financing instead of just options. While this is not a terribly optimistic option, it is realistic given the lack of enthusiasm from larger companies and retail stores to open a location in areas where poverty and food insecurity affect families the most.

Utilize School Meal Programs 

When healthy options are not just too expensive but too scarce, communities could tackle food insecurity in public schools. By making an effort to offer healthy options to students receiving free meals at schools, especially during a health crisis like COVID-19, students can learn at an early age to value and prioritize eating well. A case study of four large, urban high schools in Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, and New York looked at public schools’ responses to emergencies and how they provided students with healthy meals during a crisis. At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March of 2020, Congress authorized the distribution of federal relief packages to schools that provided meals for students experiencing food insecurity. The USDA supplemented these efforts, granting waivers to aid schools in providing food options like extended food service hours, takeout meals, and allowing parents to come to pick up meals without their children with them. Efforts like these yielded a noteworthy increase in healthy foods available and consumed by students attending these schools. This trend continued even after classes were moved online during the pandemic. The study also showed that schools that allowed adults and children to pick up food and schools that made meals with dietary restrictions in mind were hugely beneficial to students who would otherwise be considered food insecure.

Even as the COVID-19 pandemic evolves and schools start to get a handle on managing classes and events with students’ health in mind, it should be clear that food insecurity is always a health concern. School lunch programs like those implemented during the pandemic can continue in areas where food insecurity remains high due to factors other than those related to COVID-19 alone. 

Looking Ahead

The COVID-19 epidemic has prompted widespread concern for health and community wellness and specifically highlighted food security concerns. The pandemic exacerbated issues of poverty and environmental injustice. But that might ultimately draw enough attention to encourage work toward meaningful solutions to these ongoing injustices. Local, small-scale changes like allowing consistent agricultural activity in urban areas (by amending zoning regulations) or encouraging subsidy programs to help schools in food deserts revitalize the community could have a huge impact on food insecurity in the United States. If big businesses and chain stores are reluctant to enter areas with high rates of food insecurity, it is still possible for community members to utilize legal tools to make their neighborhoods healthier places to live.

 

Citations

  1. Paula Dutko et al., Characteristics and Influential Factors of Food Deserts, USDA 2 (2012), https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/45014/30940_err140.pdf.
  2. Id.
  3. Id.
  4. Monica Hake et al., The Impact of Coronavirus on Food Insecurity in 2020 & 2021, Feeding America 2 (2021), https://www.feedingamerica.org/sites/default/files/2021-03/National%20Projections%20Brief_3.9.2021_0.pdf. 
  5. Alisha Coleman-Jensen, et al., Household Food Security in the United States in 2020, ERR-298, USDA Economic Research Service, Table 2 (2021), https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/102076/err-298.pdf?v=7508.8. 
  6. Hake, supra note 3. 
  7. Niyati Parekh, Food Insecurity among Households with Children during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results from a Study among Social Media Users across the U.S., 20 NUTRITION J. 1, 2 (2021), https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12937-021-00732-2.pdf. 
  8. Anne Olson, Using Zoning to Help Eliminate Food Deserts: A Few Steps Forward, GREEN LAW, (Apr. 12, 2021), https://greenlaw.blogs.pace.edu/2021/04/12/using-zoning-to-help-eliminate-food-deserts-a-few-steps-forward/. 
  9. Id. 
  10. The Healthy Food Policy Project, Drafting Definitions in Local Healthy Food Access Policies, https://healthyfoodpolicyproject.org/drafting-definitions (last visited Mar. 9, 2022). 
  11. Id. 
  12. USDA Food and Nutrition, Off. of Pol’y Support, Evaluation of the Healthy Incentives Pilot (HIP) Final Report—Summary (2014), https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/ops/HIP-Final-Summary.pdf. 
  13. Id. 
  14. Id. 
  15. Id. 
  16. Gabriella M. McCloughlin, et al., Addressing Food Insecurity through a Healthy Equity Lens: A Case Study of Large Urban School Districts during the COVID-19 Pandemic, 97 J. URB. HEALTH 759, 759-60 (2020), https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11524-020-00476-0. 
  17. Id.
  18. Id. 
  19. Id.
  20. Id.
  21. Id.
  22. Id.
Fred Tutman discusses the lack of diversity in the mainstream environmental movement as the only Black riverkeeper in the United States and journalist for various U.S. and foreign networks.

The Beacon Blog: Between the Lines

Fred Tutman, the Only Black Riverkeeper in the United States, Discusses the Lack of Diversity in the Mainstream Environmental Movement

By Cynthia Cane, Juris Doctor Candidate (VLGS ’23) and Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

April 9, 2022

 

Fred Tuman’s journey to the environmentalism movement was unorthodox, to say the least. He spent 25 years as a contract journalist, working for various major U.S. and foreign networks, including CBS and the BBC. At 40, he enrolled in law school; but had to drop out due to family obligations. He then worked for the Water and Sewer Authority and the Prince George’s County State’s Attorney Office in Washington, D.C. 

Tutman’s entry into the Waterkeeper realm happened almost by chance: while at an environmental meeting in 2003, he met a riverkeeper called Fred Kelly. Intrigued by the concept, Tutman read The Riverkeepers by Robert Kennedy, Jr, and the rest, as they say, is history. In 2004, Tutman founded the Patuxent Riverkeeper, a non-profit organization that aims to “conserve, protect and replenish Maryland’s longest and deepest intrastate waterway.” He is currently among the longest-serving Waterkeepers in the region— and the only Black Waterkeeper in the nation. Tutman has had an eventful and successful career as a Patuxent Riverkeeper, filing numerous lawsuits to force corporations and federal agencies to obey environmental statutes. The Patuxent Riverkeeper has also given voice to communities who oppose development; for example, it was involved in a lawsuit against Maryland for approving the construction of power plants in areas that would disproportionately affect Black citizens. 

On Wednesday, March 9, Tutman spoke at a joint seminar for the Environmental Advocacy and Environmental Justice Clinics at Vermont Law School. Tutman focused on the lack of diversity in “mainstream” environmentalism. While the causes of this “white-washing” are numerous and complex, Tutman highlighted the crucial intersection between environmentalism and money, colonialism, and communities of color. First and foremost, he discussed the role that money has played in shaping environmentalism: the most prominent non-profit environmental organizations have become considerably more lucrative (the Environmental Defense Fund had reported revenue of $221 million for the 2020 fiscal year; the Sierra Club reported revenue of $214 million). Consequently, they often perpetuate harmful myths about the movement: that capitalism is inherently “good” because it can offer a degree of freedom within environmentalism that attacking global environmental issues will ultimately result in solutions to local environmental problems. 

Additionally, these organizations, and others like them, arguably comprise the “face” of the mainstream environmentalism movement and are overwhelmingly white-run and staffed. This perpetuates the harmful and worrying myth that Black and Indigenous people of color (“BIPOC”) do not care about the environment because they lack involvement in the organizations.

The current environmentalism movement, Tutman posited, is inextricably linked to colonialism, defined as “control by one power over a dependent area or people.” Such large environmental organizations are unable—and arguably unwilling—to appropriately respond to the needs of local BIPOC communities. In other words, while these so-called “big green” organizations now recognize the importance of “diversity,” they approach this concept from an optics standpoint rather than with a genuine interest in and desire to increase the organization’s inclusion and diversity. This hesitation or reluctance to increase diversity is partially fueled by the organizations’ fear of changing the “experience” of the movement for the people who are already a part of it who are predominately white. 

How have these factors affected the diversity of the mainstream environmentalism movement? Tutman noted that many, if not all, of these “big greens”, are primarily funded by corporate and other large investors; the goal of these organizations is therefore to attract funding. This reliance on corporate funding has contributed to the whitewashing of the environmentalism movement in two primary ways. Firstly, because of this country’s history, white people generally have more wealth to contribute to such organizations; consequently, they are the ones who have more readily become involved. Secondly, for these monied movements to attract investors, they must project a sense of wealth and security; whiteness is often linked to wealth and security. 

Another critical issue Tutman discussed was the seeming separation between environmental justice and nature-based work. To illustrate this issue, Tutman described a lawsuit involving Joe Mills, an elderly gentleman in Bowie, Maryland. Mill’s family farm, Oasis Farms, was surrounded by a quickly growing planned community. Under an Army Corps of Engineers permit, the developer created a six-acre pond, diverting the stream that Mills’ cows used for water and effectively rendering it useless in preparation for the development. Despite being a tributary of the Patuxent River, the stream’s small size made it vulnerable to such diversion, even under state environmental laws. The result: a legal loophole destroyed Mills’ rights to use the water on his property. When the lawsuit gained public attention, the response was outrage. However, this outrage was shockingly not directed at the exploitation of Mills; instead, at the impact the drainage line and the resulting pond had on the turtles on Mills’ property. Tutman asserted that this artificial separation of the human and environmental effects—specifically the valuing of ecological impacts (such as the turtles) over the human experience—has further contributed to the marginalization of BIPOC and lower-income communities in the environmentalism movement.

So what’s the solution? How do we facilitate diversity in the environmentalism movement in a meaningful way? Tutman asserted several ways to approach this disparity in the environmentalism movement to make it more inclusive and diverse. Firstly, he advocated for alternative approaches to environmentalism that move away from the non-profit, often corporate-funded, complex. He explained that corporate money often coerces the recipients of such funds by controlling the money flow and the conversation (stifling dissent) and hiding colonialist tendencies through philanthropy. By moving away from such sources of money, environmental organizations can better address the pressing diversity and environmental justice issues that plague the environmentalism movement. 

To this end, Tutman noted the importance of understanding the different approaches that environmental non-profits can use to enact change. He divided green organizations into two primary categories: “dark greens,” which use transactional tactics such as petitions, sign-on letters, and outreach, and “light greens,” which use transformative tactics such as litigation to create structural change. BIPOC communities exist in the “light green” space because of the existing social constraints on such communities. Tutman also noted the distinction between “turf” (where an individual belongs) and “domain” (where an individual can go). Understandably, these terms carry very different connotations for BIPOCs compared to white people; therefore, it is crucial to understand the limitations these concepts impose on other communities. Tutman asserted that humanitarianism and human-focused work should be at the forefront of any environmental movement to bridge the perceived gap between environmental justice and nature-based work. 

 

Finally, when asked what he thinks is the best approach to addressing “big green” organizations’ issue of diversity, Tutman’s response highlighted that the answer—at least in part—is simple: you should hand power over to those you want to see in power. The Patuxent Riverkeeper aims to do just that.

CAFOs compose most industrial-scale farms. These farms house thousands of animals with minimal safety and sanitary protections. But

The Beacon Blog: Consider It Briefed

Fighting Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations: The Power of Nuisance and Grassroot Movements

By Amanda Di Dio, Juris Doctor Candidate (VLGS ’23) and Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

April 8, 2022

Today, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) compose most industrial-scale animal farms. (1)  These farms often house thousands of animals in close quarters with minimal safety and sanitary protections. (2)  The waste created by the animals who live in CAFOs can contain heavy metals, pathogens, and antibiotic-resistant bacteria. (3) One way of managing this waste is to spray the waste over fields. (4) Although this practice can mitigate the harm CAFO waste has on the soil, the same procedure creates a myriad of health and justice issues. 

 

Spraying this waste creates plumes of foul-smelling, potentially toxic waste to permeate into the area’s homes, water sources, and soil. (5) These plumes have been linked to respiratory ailments, mucosal irritation, and decreased quality of life. (6) Additionally, these issues often disproportionately affect low-income, minority populations. (7) 

 

One example of this is North Carolina. (8) Here, most CAFOs are in the state’s eastern region, an area predominantly occupied by people of color. (9) The local government determines the location of CAFOs via a permitting process. (10)  Placing CAFOs in locations that disproportionately affect people of color is likely intentional. CAFOs were in this region because the government and industry followed the “path of least resistance.” (11) In short, the local government of North Carolina chose to place the CAFOs here because people of color and those in poverty are often the least likely population to be able to resist. (12)

 

North Carolina was wrong. In a recent Supreme Court case, McKiver v Murphy-Brown, residents who were being disproportionately affected brought a nuisance case against select CAFOs. (13) A nuisance exists when an individual’s actions threaten another enjoyment of their property and or the peace of an area through repeated acts. (14) Here, the residents here used NC’s nuisance laws to seek relief from CAFOs’ odors, pests, and noises. (15)  Ultimately the court held in favor of the residents and ordered the CAFO to pay $75,000 in compensatory damages to each plaintiff and $5 million in punitive damages. (16) Although this outcome did little to remedy the harm the CAFO is causing, the case opened the door to holding CAFOs accountable. (17) 

 

One major obstacle to bringing suits against CAFOs is Right to Farm Laws. Right to farm laws generally grants statutory protection against nuisance suits to CAFOs. (18) In Mckiver, the Right to Farm law was inapplicable because the nuisance had begun before the law’s passage, and the Court held the law did not apply retroactively. (19) Because of these laws, the environmental harms are increasingly being externalized to the U.S. taxpayer—specifically in rural neighborhoods. (20) The arrival of CAFOs in rural communities is consistently impacting the animals, environment, local economies, and even property values of low-income minority regions. (21)  

 

There is, however, hope. In North Carolina, two grass-root movements are challenging NC’s Fight to Farm Law: NC Environmental Justice Network (NCEJN) and Rural Empowerment Association for Community Help (REACH). (22) These organizations are working on a state level to challenge the constitutionality of Right to Farm Laws. (23) These organizations are working with the Senators and Representatives to introduce the Farm Systems Reform Act on a federal level. (24)

 

The Farm Systems Reform Act would set aside $100 billion to help industrial animal farmers voluntarily phase out CAFOs by 2040. (25) The bill has strong grassroots support for national-scale action against CAFOs. (26) If this bill passes, cases like McKiver might become less an exception and more of a norm. Fighting CAFOs’ environmental and social impacts on local communities is essential for building a more just world.

 

Citations

  1. Nichole Wendee, CAFOs and Environmental Justice: The Case of North Carolina, 121(6) ENV’T HEALTH PERSP. 182, 183. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3672924/
  2. Id. 
  3. Id.
  4. Id.
  5. Id.
  6. Id.
  7. Id.
  8. See McKiver v. Murphy-Brown 980 F.3d 937. https://casetext.com/case/mckiver-v-murphy-brown-llc-6
  9. Id.
  10. N.C.G.S.A. § 143-215.10C https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_143/GS_143-215.10C.pdf.
  11. Wendee at 183.
  12. Id.
  13. See McKiver at 946.
  14. N.C.G.S.A. § 19-1 https://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/ByArticle/Chapter_19/Article_1.pdf.
  15. Id.
  16. Id.
  17. See Randall Abate, Anthropocene Accountability Litigation: Confronting Common Enemies to Promote a Just Transition, 46 Colum. J. Envtl. L. 225, 261 (2021).
  18. § 106-702. Limitations on private nuisance actions against agricultural and forestry operations. https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_106/GS_106-702.pdf
  19. McKiver at 955.
  20. https://straydoginstitute.org/the-growing-movement-to-stop-cafos/
  21. Id.
  22. Id.
  23. Id.
  24. Id.; Farm Systems Reform Act.
  25. https://straydoginstitute.org/the-growing-movement-to-stop-cafos/
  26. Id.

The Beacon Blog: Consider It Briefed

Do We Dare Continue to Flare?

By Robert R. Turner, Jr., Juris Doctor Candidate (VLGS ’23) and Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

April 8, 2022

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishes air quality standards under the Clean Air Act. (1) The EPA permits states to draft and execute regulations to satisfy national standards in most circumstances. (2) Therefore, various state agencies administer their jurisdiction’s “methane gas” policy. (3) Here in the United States, the federal government, through the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), is responsible for managing gas and oil exploration and extraction on Native American and national lands. (4) The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) oversees the administration of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). (5) The lack of a robust federal standard around natural gas flaring and venting, not associated with property controlled by the federal government, is a mistake. (6) 

Natural gas flaring and venting is a significant problem and the very problem that the federal government should address. Indeed, the EPA, under the Obama administration, in 2016, completed Quad Oa, also known as the “New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for [volatile organic compounds] VOC[s] and methane emissions from the oil and gas sector,” which is a substantial source of methane emissions. (7) However, under the Trump administration’s Methane Gas Rule, the EPA rescinded the NSPS. (8)   

Conversely, under President Biden, the EPA has advanced the new Clean Air Act rule to significantly and environmentally reduce methane emissions and other health-harming air pollutants that put nearby communities at risk. (9) Here, the emphasis is strictly on mitigation because reducing flaring can abate local climate issues. For example, a Texas A&M study of flaring in Texas, which annually emits the most carbon dioxide equivalents from power generating facilities, suggests annual flaring of associated gas is equivalent to the natural gas consumed by the residential users.  (10) In addition, approximately $750 million of casinghead gas was flared in 2018 in the Permian Basin, specifically with no public welfare. (11) 

Global warming, in part, is a result of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases—such as carbon dioxide and methane—have a heat-trapping impact on climate. (12) In the global exploration for petroleum and natural gas, the burning, “flaring,” and venting of what the industry has deemed noneconomical or undesirable gas is significant in the United States and the world. (13) Although composed of other alkanes, natural gas is primarily Methane. (14) Methane is a potent greenhouse gas that contributes significantly to global warming. (15) Although Methane’s presence in the atmosphere is less than Carbon dioxide, during a 100-year timeframe, according to the EPA, Methane holds twenty-five times the heat in the atmosphere than Carbon dioxide. (16) 

In 2020, the global amount of natural gas flared equaled 142 billion cubic meters (bcm) or 465 billion cubic feet (bcf). (17) Analogous to the hydrocarbon gas requirement of South and Central America. (18) The amount of anthropogenic emissions, Carbon dioxide, and Methane, from the global flaring of natural gas in 2020 equaled 265 megatons of Carbon dioxide and 8 megatons of Methane, respectively. (19) Remarkably, Algeria, Iraq, Iran, Russia, and the United States made up the most flaring quantities worldwide. (20)

Regardless of geographical location, the quest for petroleum is often associated with discovering natural gas. Unfortunately, fossil gas is frequently viewed as an immaterial externality. (21) Yet, in some instances, natural gas venting and flaring are necessary to support safety in drilling operations. (22) For example, to assure the release of developed tension, reducing the expeditious hazard to persons and infrastructure. (23) Since 2010, natural gas flaring and venting have increased 1.52 times or 152 percent in production areas. (24) However, the venting and flaring data collected by producing state administration agencies, specifically Texas and North Dakota, reported to the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA), does not accurately represent these states’ actual flaring activities. (25)

There are further reasons to curb the flaring of natural gas. Along with Carbon dioxide and Methane, particle pollution such as particulate matter and nitrogen oxides are examples of pollutants discharged into the atmosphere from flaring. (26) Particulate matter can hurt the cardiovascular and pulmonary systems, resulting in more illnesses or hospitalization, absenteeism from work or school, and fatalities. (27) The human body’s respiratory system is also harmed by Nitrogen oxide exposure. (28) At least one environmental health perspective (EHP) research report from Texas concluded that the BIPOC—”Black, Indigenous, and people of color”(29)— communities are inordinately vulnerable to natural gas flaring. (30) 

There are, indeed, effective methods of properly using noneconomical or undesirable natural gas. (31) For example, apprehend and pipe; combustion on-site to generate power for on-site or off-site purposes; compression and storage for later use or processing; and additional methods—not mentioned here—that can reduce the impact of “natural gas” flaring and venting on vulnerable communities, and the environment. (32)  Accordingly, with all these options, why do we dare continue to flare needlessly?

Citations

  1. U.S. DEP’T. OF ENERGY (DOE), OFFICE OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS, OFFICE OF FOSSIL ENERGY, NATURAL GAS FLARING AND VENTING: STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATORY OVERVIEW 17 (2019); HYDROGEN PROGRAM PLAN (2020), https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/08/f65/Natural%20Gas%20Flaring%20and%20Venting%20Report.pdf.  
  2. Id.
  3. Id. see also Karine Lacroix et al., Should it be called “Natural Gas” or “Methane”? (2020), https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/should-it-be-called-natural-gas-or-methane/.pdf.  
  4. DOE, supra note 1.
  5. DOE, OFFICE OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS, U.S. FEDERAL OFFSHORE GAS FLARING AND VENTING REGULATIONS 2 (2020),https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/06/f75/U.S.%20Federal%20Offshore%20Gas%20Flaring%20and%20Venting%20Regulations%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf. 
  6. Eric Groten et al., Vinson & Elkins,  EPA Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas Industry Finally Finalized and Immediately Headed Back to Court (2020), https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/epa-methane-regulations-for-oil-and-gas-52874/#:~:text=Methane%20was%20regulated%20as%20an%20AIR%20POLLUTANT%20BASED,MORE%20THAN%2025%20TIMES%20THAT%20OF%20CARBON%20DIOXIDE.%E2%80%9D.pdf. 
  7. Id.
  8. Id.
  9. Id. 
  10. Gunnar W. Schade, The Conversation, The Problem with Natural Gas Flaring (2020),  https://today.tamu.edu/2020/08/03/the-problem-with-natural-gas-flaring/.
  11.  Id.
  12. CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCE BOARD [CARB], AB 32 GLOBAL WARMING SOLUTIONS ACT 2006 (2018), ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLE PROGRAM (2021), https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/ab-32-global-warming-solutions-act-2006.pdf. 
  13. U.S. ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION (EIA), NATURAL GAS VENTED AND FLARED 2 (2022), https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_prod_sum_a_epg0_vgv_mmcf_a.htm.
  14. Balasubramanian Viswanathan, Energy Sources, Natural Gas 59 – 60 (2017), https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/B9780444563538000034?token=758F0D2451C06DE5E46D9C642349E9379C3B46BFD2CC2BDC83E9F548C32218769599D90E3C7C13E5D30DDCA6D87138C5&originRegion=us-east-1&originCreation=20220307091558.pdf. 
  15. Karine Lacroix et al., Should it be called “Natural Gas” or “Methane”? (2020), https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/should-it-be-called-natural-gas-or-methane/.pdf. 
  16. EPA, GLOBAL METHANE INITIATIVE IMPORTANCE OF METHANE (2021), https://www.epa.gov/gmi/importance-methane.pdf. 
  17. IMF, Flaring Emissions, Tracking Report 2021 (Nov. 2021), https://www.iea.org/reports/flaring-emissions.pdf. 
  18. Id.
  19. Id.
  20. Id.
  21. Id. 
  22. Id. 
  23. Id.
  24. U.S. ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION (EIA), NATURAL GAS VENTED AND FLARED (2022), https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_prod_sum_a_epg0_vgv_mmcf_a.htm. 
  25. U.S. DEP’T. OF ENERGY (DOE), OFFICE OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS, OFFICE OF FOSSIL ENERGY, NATURAL GAS FLARING AND VENTING: STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATORY OVERVIEW 17 (2019); HYDROGEN PROGRAM PLAN (2020), https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/08/f65/Natural%20Gas%20Flaring%20and%20Venting%20Report.pdf. 
  26. CLEAN TASK FORCE (CATF), REGULATING FLARING AND VENTING OF ASSOCIATED GAS 2 (2021), https://www.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/CATF_EPAFlaringRegulationsSummary_2Pager_08.09.21_v2.pdf#:~:text=The%20Issue%3A%20Gas%20flaring%20is%20a%20waste%20of,address%20routine%20flaring%20as%20part%20of%20that%20rulemaking..pdf. 
  27. Id. 
  28. Id. 
  29. Id. 
  30. Lara J. Cushing et al., Flaring from Unconventional Oil and Gas Development and Birth Outcomes in the Eagle Ford Shale in South Texas 7-8 (2020),  https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/pdf/10.1289/EHP6394.pdf. 
  31. DOE, supra note 1 at 50.
  32. DOE,
  33. supra
  34. note 1 at 50-52.
Gender equality is worsened by climate change. Yet climate change does not discriminate—people do.

The Beacon Blog: Consider It Briefed

The Future is ___: Gender Inclusion in Climate Crisis Solutions

By Beckett McGowan, Juris Doctor Candidate (VLGS ’23), Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

April 7, 2022

Climate Change is the great exasperator. Countless research has warned of the climate catastrophe that will happen if anthropogenic carbon emissions continue to rise: sea-level rise will accelerate, tropical storms will occur in greater number with greater severity, and droughts will grow harsher and longer. (1) However, natural disasters are not the only thing exasperated by Climate Change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned that Climate Change could contribute to human conflicts. (2) However, wars over natural resources are not the only forms of conflict that will be fueled by Climate Change. Social divisions will also be compounded by the effects of Climate Change, as the crisis worsens.

 

One key social issue that is worsened by Climate Change is gender inequality.  The impact of climate-driven conflict is not distributed equally along gender lines. (3) Women and LGBT individuals “face higher risks and greater burdens from the impacts of climate change in situations of poverty.” (4) For example, after climate disasters, women have a higher mortality rate, which occurs in part because women are “responsible for vulnerable populations like women or children during the disasters.” (5) Additionally, incidents of gender violence (including homophobic and transphobic incidents) increase after people are displaced from disasters. (6) Natural disasters fueled by Climate Change expose individuals to harm from both the natural disaster and from gender discrimination as well. 

 

Women and members of the LGBT community cannot be left behind as the world struggles with and adapts to Climate Change. In fact, Women and LGBT individuals actively participate in grassroots movements, such as environmental justice and climate justice, to avoid being left behind. For instance, women make up 90 percent of environmental justice movement organizations. (7) Women of color especially have been instrumental in the early days of the environmental justice movement since they brought experience from the Civil Rights Movement. (8) LGBT activists groups have been active in environmental and climate justice movements as well. Several LGBT groups signed on to the Group of Ten Letter in the 1990s that criticized mainstream environmental groups for their lack of inclusivity. (9) Additionally, there are a growing number of LGBT groups that are dedicated towards climate justice. (10) These efforts show that women and LGBT individuals are active in fighting against the impact that climate change has on both the environment and themselves.

 

While Climate Change does not discriminate when it comes to its impact, people do. Often, women and LGBT individuals are left to fend for themselves when climate disasters wreak havoc on their communities. However, it should not be their responsibility alone to make sure that they are accounted for in Climate Change solutions. If humans expect to survive the climate crisis, then everyone needs to be involved in the decision-making process and be able to reap its rewards.

 

 

Citations

  1. See e.g. Alice C. Hill, et al., A World Overheating, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Oct. 18, 2021, https://www.cfr.org/article/climate-change-world-overheating-how-countries-adapt-extreme-temperature?gclid=CjwKCAiA4KaRBhBdEiwAZi1zznnr6u_8p1evOyqqNLqGMekDyOq4hf0E8RChwSmOV4nx30hJbfJ5lhoCF4cQAvD_BwE.
  2. Vally Koubi, Climate Change and Conflict, 22 Annual Review of Political Science, 343, 343 (2019). 
  3. Rebecca Pearse, Gender and climate change, 8 WIRES CLIMATE CHANGE, 1, 1 (2017) (“climate change could become a major contributing factor to conflicts by exacerbating the scarcity of important natural resources”). 
  4. UNFCCC, Introduction to Gender and Climate Change, https://unfccc.int/gender (last visited Mar. 11, 2022); see generally G. Gaard, Feminism and Env’t Justice, HANDBOOK OF ENV’T JUSTICE (2017).
  5. Beckett McGowan, Env’t Sexism: Another Lens for Env’t Justice (2021) (on file with author); see generally Gaard, supra note 4.  
  6. See M.P. Anastario, et. al., Using Mental Health Indicators to Identify Postdisaster Gender-based Violence among Women Displaced by Hurricane Katrina, 9 J. OF WOMEN’S HEALTH, 1437. 
  7. N Unger, The Role of Gender in Env’t Justice, ENV’T JUSTICE, 1, 115 (2008). 
  8. See S. Rainey & G. Johnson, Grassroots Activism: An exploration of women of color’s role in the environmental justice movement, 16 GENDER AND CLASS, (2009). 
  9. Gaard, supra note 4. 
  10. See id. (listing grassroots organizations, including: the Trans and Woman’s Action Camp (TWAC), Out4Sustainability, Lesbian Rangers, and queer food and farmer movements). 
An interview with Arielle V. King (VLS '21) and founder of Intersectional Environmentalism

The Beacon Blog: Trail Notes

Arielle V. King’s Trail Notes

Edited by Kai Hardy, Michelle Amidzich, and Andrea Salazar

March 30, 2022

“I really believe that every single person has a role to play in fighting climate change and improving the state of our world.”

Interviewee: Arielle V. King (VLS ’21), Environmental Justice Staff Attorney at the Environmental Law Institute; Visiting Professor at Bard College at Simon’s Rock; and Content Creator at Intersectional Environmentalist

 

Q: Please tell me about where you grew up and your first experiences with the environment.

 

A: I grew up in Albany, NY; specifically, the South End which is considered an environmental justice (EJ) community because of the number of public transportation ports-trains, highways, bus depots, and things that were close to where I grew up. Most of my classmates had severe asthma. For about 8 years there were trains that carried crude oil (we called them bomb trains) less than ten feet from a huge housing project and an elementary school. Looking back, I did not think about environmental justice—I didn’t even know that term until college.

 

From a young age, I was passionate about the environment. I got involved with making sure my school was recycling, coordinating Earth Day rallies, helping create community gardens, and other things. I also spent a lot of time outdoors because of my mentor, a community leader and activist named Brother Yusef. Most people I grew up with didn’t have many opportunities to cultivate an appreciation for the natural world. He’s since passed, but he worked for the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) for the State of New York, and his mission was to help inner-city kids and kids of color cultivate a love for the outdoors. I recently took part in a ribbon-cutting ceremony dedicating a walking trail to him in the city. Because of him, I also spent a week on the Hudson River learning about river ecology on a working sloop and spent a few weeks at an environmental education camp in the Catskills. 

 

Q: Why did you decide to go to law school?

 

A: As a kid, my dad called me “lawyer girl.” I always wanted to be a lawyer, but I was always going back and forth about the type of law I wanted to practice. I’m a singer so I thought I wanted to practice entertainment law for a while. But, ultimately, my passion for the environment prevailed, which led me to environmental law.

 

In high school, I took an advanced placement course in environmental science where I learned that environmental studies included the study of the planet and people (and the ways that we impact each other). That was eye-opening for me. From there, I studied environmental and sustainability studies with a concentration in political ecology in college, where I completed the joint-degree program with Vermont Law School (VLS). In four years, I got my bachelor’s from Bard College at Simon’s Rock and my Master’s in Environmental Law and Policy from VLS. Once I started law school, I did not envision myself as a litigator. But I knew I wanted to use my law degree as a tool to advocate on behalf of communities experiencing environmental injustice.

Q: Taking a step back to your time in law school, I wanted to ask specifically about the Environmental Justice Law Society (EJLS) and some of the drivers behind why you founded it.

A: Of course. So first, I did not found it by myself. Sherri Williams White (VLS ’18), Ryan Mitchell (VLS ’19), Jameson Davis (VLS ’21), Maggie Galka (VLS ’18), Jess Debski (VLS ’20), Kyron Williams (VLS ’19), and I founded it together. When I started my master’s program, I thought, “Okay, I’m at one of the top environmental law schools in the country. Why isn’t there an environmental justice focus? Why can’t I just take a bunch of classes on environmental justice and have that be my thing?” At the time, it wasn’t an option. 

When I got to Vermont Law School, there was one environmental justice course taught during the summer. If you were a traditional JD student, you couldn’t take it. I just happened to be a student during the year we had a visiting faculty professor named Kathleen Faulk. Professor Faulk had just completed her time working with the Department of Health and Human Services to administer human services to Flint, Michigan during the Flint Water Crisis. So, the whole class was essentially just talking about health law, public health, environmental justice, and environmental racism. Professor Faulk assigned each student a different stakeholder role from the City of Flint, and we presented each week based on that role. This course aligned with my prior experience writing my college senior thesis on the Flint Water Crisis, so I was essentially the class historian.

I was in that class with Sherri (who worked for the EPA for many years before law school), Jameson, and Kyron (who taught physics at Florida A&M before coming to VLS). The group of us thought, “We’ve got to do something about this lack of environmental justice advocacy on campus.” Since Sherri organized the previous year’s Solutions Conference, which was focused on environmental justice, we also knew it was clear that the school yearned for more environmental justice education opportunities. Building from that momentum is how we started the Environmental Justice Law Society at Vermont Law School.

We got our first grant from a local foundation to host programs and educate our campus about environmental justice. So, we were giving presentations and sharing our personal connections to environmental justice along with the history of the movement and the way environmental injustice impacted certain communities in Vermont. Soon, EJLS started noticing state representatives at our presentations taking a lot of notes because they wanted to learn more about environmental justice. 

EJLS then started presenting at schools. One of the most exciting events we participated in was the Hanover High School Martin Luther King, Jr. Celebration in 2019 where I and two other EJLS Board members were keynote speakers. We talked about the history of the environmental justice movement, including MLK’s role in the nascent years, in front of 700 high school students. We printed giant posters with pictures and timelines and asked for student participation. Because I’m a board member of Positive Tracks, a national nonprofit based in Hanover, NH, I recently spoke to a group of students who said, “I remember you gave this presentation when I was a freshman and it helped me understand so much!” And that right there is why I do community education and outreach.

 

Since then, the environmental justice presence on campus has grown tremendously. I’m proud of the way that EJLS has evolved in such a short amount of time. The first conference we hosted in 2018 was in New Haven, CT as a partnership with Yale’s School of Public Health and School of the Environment. The following year, we added Duke and hosted the conference in North Carolina, focusing on Hog CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations), where we included a very impactful tour of the area. In 2021, we added Howard and Shaw University and hosted the conference virtually. The plan is to keep adding at least one school every year until it becomes a national conference. I appreciate the passion for the organization’s work. And if it weren’t for us, a passionate group of students that came together, the EJ clinic or the Climate Justice Practicum might not exist. There are many things that worked out in a beautiful way as a result of this passion. 

Q: What is something that not everyone knows about environmental justice that you have come to know?

 

A: One thing I want people to recognize is that EJ must also include advocacy and protections for incarcerated people and communities with disabilities. I want to find ways to include these groups in more EJ conversations. Riker’s Island, for example, was built on top of toxic waste. And lead is still on the walls and in the pipes of prisons across this country. The drinking water is not of sufficient quality. And Black and Brown populations predominantly occupy prisons, so just thinking about the impacts of that and how it contributes to environmental racism is important. And considerations for communities with disabilities are frequently forgotten during environmental hazard mitigation and planning, and many other aspects of environmentalism. We can’t forget about those who are already overlooked. That’s one of the most important aspects of environmental justice. Environmental protection, advocacy, and decision-making must be intersectional and inclusive to ensure we are not leaving anyone out. 

Q: How does environmental justice differ from environmentalism?

A: The EJ movement began as a result of unequal enforcement of environmental laws and the dumping of toxic waste into BIPOC and low-income neighborhoods across the United States. The movement for environmental justice also exists as a result of the lack of inclusion, and often blatant erasure, of people of color in mainstream environmentalism. Now, we’re finally starting to see national recognition of what EJ leaders and advocates have been telling us for decades, and the environmental movement as a whole is finally coming to terms with the ways environmental racism has been perpetuated in decision-making and conservation efforts. 

Environmental justice is rooted in civil rights and the idea that regardless of race, national origin, and income status, all people deserve a healthy environment to live, work, play, and pray in. This extends mainstream environmentalism’s view of the environment beyond mere protection of the natural world and includes human and social elements, like the existence of racism, that are inextricably linked. It saddens me that the summer of 2020 had to happen for environmental nonprofits and institutions to recognize this link. The U.S. conservation movement is built upon a notion that before colonization, the country was an idyllic Eden untouched by man, which erases the existence and justified the displacement of millions of Indigenous people from the landscape. 

Environmental justice simply amplifies the faults of the environmental movement and tries to rectify them in the most inclusive way possible. Environmentalism must be intersectional. 

Q: What was the most valuable lesson that you’ve learned since graduating from law school?

A: Well, it’s all so new, and it’s hard to say. Throughout law school, I participated in activities and programs that helped me remember my “Why?” I came to law school to help people and participating in all these extracurricular activities was me reminding myself of my “Why?” Law school’s tough. If I hadn’t had these opportunities to be active in my community and contribute to something greater, I probably would’ve lost myself. And I’m reaping the benefits of that extra work right now (post-grad). I made a lot of connections during law school because I was very intentional about networking with people that were doing the things I was interested in pursuing. I’ve cultivated a strong professional network of mentors and people that I can reach out to. Being involved in the early development of the school’s EJ clinic, co-founding EJLS, and working on all the projects that came out of it, including Rural Environmental Justice Opportunities Informed by Community Expertise (REJOICE), helped me gain important skills that aren’t ordinarily taught in law school. If it weren’t for that I wouldn’t even have this job.

Q: What do you hope your crowning achievement will be?

A: I believe that I was put on this planet to help people. So, I will feel the greatest sense of accomplishment when I can continuously see the impact of the work that I’ve done, the people I’ve helped, the people I’ve shared information with, and the people I’ve educated. I’ve shared book recommendations that have opened people’s eyes and encouraged them to get active in the fight for a more environmentally just and equitable world. That’s what means the most to me. I really just want to build a career that is contributing to the environmental justice movement: the movement for environmental liberation and self-determination of communities that have been environmentally overburdened, politically overlooked, and altogether underserved. I have no idea what it is yet, but those are some of the elements of what I hope my crowning achievement will be.

Q: What is the last piece of advice you would like to share?

A: I really believe that every single person has a role to play in fighting climate change and improving the state of our world. We can all do it in different ways. I have a hard time with people saying that you have to go to college to contribute to this fight. And I know that I’m very privileged in the fact that I’ve had so much education. But I don’t think I’m different from anyone else. That’s why I try hard to share the books that I’ve read in school and the resources I’ve learned from. I’m really passionate about breaking down the ivory tower, or at least making it shorter and easier to access, because I just think that’s really the only way we’re going to build a better society—by getting everyone involved in the process. So, that means artists, architects, or developers—everyone—has to be involved to get it done.

EcoPerspectives Blog

A “Ripe and Rank Cape of Dishonorable Dealings”: How Fireworks are Threatening Sioux Sovereignty of the Black Hills

By Morgan Muenster, Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

March 23, 2022

 

A fight has been brewing in the Black Hills of South Dakota—and it has the potential to turn explosive.

 

Fireworks have long been a symbol of patriotism on Independence Day, and the fireworks at Mount Rushmore were, for many years, a spectacle of allegiance and patriotism. South Dakota, with permits from the Department of the Interior and the National Parks Service (NPS), conducted a fireworks celebration at Mount Rushmore from 1998-2009, only skipping the celebration in 2002 due to wildfireconcerns . The show was cancelled in 2010 (once again due to wildfire concerns), and did not return until 2020 .

 

In 2019, President Trump and South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem urged the National Parks Service to again allow fireworks at Mount Rushmore, calling for “a very exciting Fourth of July .” However, fireworks in the Black Hills are symbolic of something much deeper and more sinister.

 

The Black Hills were once the home of the Lakota people, which they called He Sapa—”black ridge .” The Lakota, one of the seven Sioux nations, emerged on the Great Plains during the eighteenth century, and quickly took over some of the most fertile buffalo hunting grounds in the West . To the Lakota and other Sioux nations, the Hills are the sacred center of the world, and are integral to their spiritual practices . The Lakota lived on these lands for years, even resisting the advances of white colonists in the early nineteenth century . Eventually, the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 preserved the Black Hills as exclusively Lakota land .

 

Yet the traditions of America’s colonial campaign reached even the Lakota. A gold rush in the 1870’s resulted in dispossession of the Black Hills from the Lakota, essentially rendering the Fort Laramie treaty moot . Today, the Lakota people inhabit some of the poorest counties in the United States—a lingering effect of the horrifying campaign of indigenous land dispossession .

 

Still, Mount Rushmore, located on Lakota territory, remains one of America’s most recognizable landmarks, drawing thousands of tourists every year. A fireworks show over the faces of America’s “great men” screams patriotism and ultra-Americanism. Which is exactly why the fireworks show should be permanently cancelled.

 

Firstly, a fireworks show could have severe environmental impacts on the native land of the Lakota Sioux. Although the NPS issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the event in 2019, their actions since then have shown that the opposite is true . In anticipation of the return of fireworks in 2019, the Parks Service conducted a controlled burn near Mount Rushmore estimated to cost$30,000. The purpose? To reduce the probability of a wildfire catching on dry trees and brush . The Parks Service has also stated that the event may be cancelled depending on dry conditions in the area; yet the Black Hills are especially susceptible to drought, and have been experiencing dry conditions for years, calling into question how dry conditions need to be for the fireworks to be cancelled . In past years, 60 to 80 firefighters have been on standby to stop potential fires from occurring . Additionally, activists have called attention to the increase of groundwater contamination and debris left behind by the fireworks .

 

These are not illogical concerns. From 1998 to 2009, the Mount Rushmore fireworks caused twenty documented wildfires . The Mount Rushmore fireworks pose a serious threat to sacred Lakota land.

 

Beyond environmental concerns, the fireworks show is the perfect symbol of a culture built on the stolen land of indigenous peoples. Even Mount Rushmore itself is a symbol of oppression—the mountain was sacred to the Lakota, which they called Six Grandfathers in reference to the earth, the sky, and the four directions . Now, many see it as a symbol of all they have lost.

 

After announcing the return of the fireworks, President Trump hosted a July Third rally at Mount Rushmore, where he declared that “Mount Rushmore will stand forever as an eternal tribute to our forefathers and to our freedom .” At the same time, twenty Lakota protestors were arrested for protesting Trump’s visit, with one activist facing jail time of over sixteen years . These activists say that instead of being a “shrine of democracy,” Mount Rushmore is instead “an international symbol of white supremacy .” And South Dakota is intent to keep it that way.

 

In 2021, Governor Noem filed suit against the NPS and other federal organizations, seeking a mandatory preliminary injunction to compel the NPS to grant a special use permit for the Mount Rushmore fireworks (the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe later joined as anintervenor ). However, the Court denied the request for injunction, stating that the NPS’s decision to deny the permit was not arbitrary nor capricious . While this was a short-term victory for the Sioux nations that inhabit the Black Hills, a decision has not yet been made for 2022. Already, Governor Noem has renewed her request for a 2022 fireworks permit .

 

The fireworks battle is not over, and South Dakota has not signaled a willingness to give into the demands of the Sioux nations. Yet the Biden administration appears to be more willing to side with the Sioux—or possibly more concerned with environmental effects of the fireworks. Even the Supreme Court has noted the injustices faced by the Sioux Nations, stating about the takeover of the Black Hills “[a] more ripe and rank case of dishonorable dealings will never, in all probability, be found in our history .” The Court awarded the Sioux what in 2021 would be over two billion dollars (none of the Sioux nations have accepted this money, stating that the Black Hills are not for sale). Yet the injustices against the people of the Black Hills continue. Fireworks over Mount Rushmore are no more a symbol of patriotism than they are of hypocrisy.

EcoPerspectives Blog

Arizona’s Extreme Heat and Its Effect on the Homeless Population

By Vaughn Ford-Plotkin, Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

March 23, 2022

 

For many people living in the United States, experiencing temperatures that exceed 110 degrees Fahrenheit is unfathomable, but for the residents of Maricopa County, Arizona, this is an almost daily occurrence during the Summer months. These extreme temperatures are becoming more common throughout the rest of the year as well. In 2020, Phoenix, Arizona had 145 days where the recorded temperature exceeded 100 degrees, with 102 of those days exceeding 105 degrees . The effects of extreme heat are impossible for anyone to fully escape, as constant water consumption, avoiding direct sunlight, and the use of Air Conditioning are recommended to “Survive the Summer” in Phoenix . While mitigation strategies do exist, this did not prevent 323 heat related deaths from occurring in Maricopa County in 2020 . In September 2021, there were already 113 heat related deaths, up from 55 at the same time in 2020 . Of the 323 deaths in 2021, 146 of these deceased individuals were identified as being homeless .

 

Homeless people suffer the effects of extreme heat in Maricopa County with little opportunity for mitigation because they lack access to adequate hydration and air-conditioned indoor repose. Encampments have developed across Maricopa County. These encampments are where unsheltered homeless people use makeshift tents and umbrellas in attempt to avoid direct sunlight and escape the heat. The largest of these encampments was next to my employer’s office over the Summer of 2021. Through participation in handing out cold water bottles and other materials, I learned first-hand that volunteer efforts such as these were largely depended on by the unsheltered community to stay alive. As rent prices increase and the amount of accessible living situations dwindle, more of these encampments have appeared across Maricopa County . These numbers will only grow as the number of homeless individuals in Arizona continue to increase . 

 

These living conditions are already abhorrent, but they are made even more demeaning by the constant reported misconduct and abuse homeless individuals suffer at the hands of Phoenix Police . Reported instances include police officers disposing of homeless people’s possessions when doing “clean ups” at encampments, and arresting advocates who attempt to help protect and give a voice to the homeless people in Maricopa County . These actions by Phoenix Police have even led to a DOJ investigation into the constitutionality of the conduct taken towards homeless individuals . Attempting to survive the extreme heat waves without shelter, while being harassed and displaced by police officers, adds insult to injury for homeless individuals in Maricopa County. This mistreatment of people suffering one of the most dehumanizing and unsettling experiences one can imagine holds up a mirror to us as a society. This leads to important questions we need to ask ourselves: Are we encouraging the abuse and neglect of the most disenfranchised people in our society? Are we ignoring it out of disdain or fear? And what, besides four walls and a roof, separates us from these individuals? 

 

While these are important question to ask, they are philosophical and abstract in nature. This article is meant to broach them, but I also would like to address the tangible and direct actions that can be taken to help homeless people while these philosophical dilemmas are pondered. 

 

 In Phoenix, there’s a group called UnshelteredPhx who operate as a street watch team that documents homeless people and their interactions with the police . They also operate as a volunteer service and fund raiser. They collect supplies like water and umbrellas in the summer to give to homeless individuals, and blankets and jackets for the winter months . This is an example of mitigation at a grassroots level to help prevent homeless people from experiencing injury and death from the effects of extreme heat. These direct actions are helpful during the present extreme weather being faced, but long terms actions and plans are just as important. Lobbying city councils to construct more shelters with adequate space and the development of more affordable housing options are good long-term actions to get people off the streets and out of the heat. Extreme heat in Arizona will continue to be life threatening, as it is a desert in the middle of its 27th year of an extreme drought . Despite these facts, there is no excuse for the continued deaths of homeless people. The resources exist to prevent these tragedies from continuing to occur. Homeless people are still people, entitled to the same rights as sheltered individuals. The treatment of the most vulnerable and disenfranchised people speaks directly about us as a society; what do you want it to say?

EcoPerspectives Blog

The Successor to Lithium-Ion: More Abundant, Sustainable, and Functional Energy Storage for Vehicle Electrification. Cans Can.

By Matthew Bakerpoole, Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

March 23, 2022

 

The electrification of vehicles represents a substantial economic and environmental opportunity. The electrification transition should power electric vehicles (EV) with recycled cans to have the most impact. Environmental and electrification advocates should push for both better and best solutions to the problem of transportation emissions. To that end, advocates should resist the sunk cost fallacy and support the widescale development of aluminum ion batteries (Al-ion) as they may now represent the best energy storage solution for EVs .

 

The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse emissions in the U.S., representing 29 percent of total emissions . Road vehicles represent 82% (58% from light-duty and 24% from medium and heavy-duty) of transportation emissions or 23% of all U.S. emissions . Accordingly, the electrification of vehicles presents an opportunity to dramatically cut emissions to achieve emissions reduction goals by 2050. The transportation sector must mass-produce high energy density, low cost per mile, and low emissions per unit of energy storage solutions to maximize this opportunity. With that requirement in mind, the industry and regulators should consider all viable storage technologies and not stubbornly fall into the sunk cost trap . 

 

One technology that has recently been presented as a better solution than the industry’s current pick, lithium-ion batteries (Li-ion), is aluminum-ion batteries . Al-ions provide a higher energy density, dramatically faster charging, more charge cycles, lower input cost volatility, and near-infinite recyclability, all while resulting in lower net emissions and cost . 

 

While Li-ions have received significant capital investment and made a transition to renewable energy generation and EVs possible, the technology has several drawbacks. Lithium is toxic in high concentrations and reacts violently when exposed to oxygen, occasionally resulting in vehicle fires after collisions . The scarce elemental components of Li-ions, nickel, and cobalt are subject to price volatility due to competing global demand . In the last ten years, lithium and cobalt prices have been subject to dramatic fluctuations, increasing in price by as much as 326% and 233%, respectively . Both supplying and disposing of the elements required by Li-ions presents significant environmental risks. They are sourced in countries with lax enforcement of environmental and labor protection measures and are difficult to recycle . The estimated lifecycle carbon dioxide (CO2) to energy storage (kilowatt-hour, kWh) ratio of Li-ions is 73 kg CO2 / kWh. Li-ions have a life cycle of around 1000 recharges from a 20% discharge . They also take significantly longer to ‘refuel’ than internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEV). Currently, the fastest EV charge time is 15 minutes . Each of these drawbacks is likely to delay EV adoption as both the free market and political forces resist the transition based on the argument that EVs are an inferior product to ICEVs. 

 

Electrification needs to defeat as many opposition arguments as possible to ensure electrification meets 2050 emissions reductions. Nascent Al-ion technology currently represents the most viable solution. 

 

As the elemental components of Al-ions, aluminum (sourced from bauxite) and carbon (graphene, sourced from graphite), are both non-toxic and among the most common on the planet, Al-ions pose a less environmentally and economically risky solution than Li-ions . Aluminum does not suffer from the same chemical reactivity as lithium and does not combust when exposed to oxygen . Unlike lithium and cobalt-primarily mined in Chile and the Democratic Republic of Congo-aluminum and carbon are available domestically or from diverse international sources . The abundance of Al-ion components contributes to a lower cost per stored kWh . Not only are the components more common and more affordable than Li-ion’s, but Al-ions are nearly infinitely recyclable resulting in significant relative emissions reductions . Production of Al-ions represents an approximate 47% reduction in CO2 emissions per kWh when compared to Li-ions, lifecycle analysis of Al-ion storage has been estimated to produce “0.7 kg of CO2eq, while Li-ion batteries produce an estimated 1.3 kg of CO2eq .” Further opportunities to reduce the emissions associated with recycling Al-ions are found in the potential of powering aluminum recycling facilities with renewable sources like solar photovoltaics. Even if Al-ions displace Li-ions in EVs, market investment for Li-ions will not be wasted. Parallel markets in the stationary energy storage or secondary transportation markets still represent green pastures for existing Li-ion production .

 

In addition to the economic and environmental impacts, Al-ions offer better performance in key areas when compared to Li-ions. New Al-ions claim to achieve higher power density and don’t suffer from the same peak current and temperature limitations of Li-ions . Al-ions also degrade more slowly than Li-ions through lifetime charging cycles . Most importantly for undecided consumers, Al-ions charge 60 times faster than Li-ions, addressing the fear of stranding due to long charge times . Once comparable energy density is proven, EVs equipped with Al-ions will represent a significant product improvement for customers on the fence between EVs and ICEVs.

 

If there is one constant, it’s change. Technological change comes in waves and is occasionally delayed by past economic investments . Environmental and electrification advocates have a challenging task ahead of them in reaching 2050 emissions reductions goals. Advocates should not settle for solutions that are good enough for today. They need to keep their eyes on the technological horizon and push for the development and implementation of better solutions. Li-ions facilitated the initial development and deployment of large-scale renewable energy sources and initial electrification efforts. But technology keeps changing. Al-ions may now represent an even better economic, environmental, and consumer-based solution than Li-ion EVs and ICEVs. What could be more environmentally friendly than recycling your aluminum cans into an EV road trip?

EcoPerspectives Blog

Man Camps, Oil Pipelines, and MMIW: How United States v. Cooley is a False Victory for Indigenous Tribes

By Kimberly N. Mitchell, Staff Editor for the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law

March 23, 2022

 

Tribal officers’ hands continue to be bound after United States v. Cooley (hereafter Cooley), carrying on the violence against missing and murdered indigenous women (MMIW) . Cooley allows tribal officers to temporarily detain non-Indian members in Indian Country . However, that is the crux of the issue – the detainment is only temporary. Tribal officers still have to turn offenders over to State or Federal law enforcement .

 

The precedent case governing tribal criminal jurisdiction is Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe (hereafter Oliphant ). Oliphant held that tribes lack criminal jurisdiction over non-Indian members in Indian Country, dismissing inherent tribal sovereignty . Why is this a problem? Tribal governments lack the criminal jurisdiction to prosecute non-Indian members who traffic women and girls. 

 

“Man camps” are located near the oil extraction projects that employ them. “Man camps” can be defined as “temporary housing provided to employees of large extraction projects .” These camps have increased violence against Native women, as the men from these camps prey on the local Indigenous communities . For instance, the Tribal Police on the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota “reported more murders, fatal accidents, sexual assaults, domestic disputes, drug busts, gun threats, and human trafficking cases than in any year before .” Surrounding counties have similar reports, but there is a special difference with Fort Berthold compared to the rest of North Dakota. The reservation’s population “has more than doubled” due to the “influx of non-Indian oil workers .”  

 

Human trafficking exists worldwide and all over the United States,; however, the prevalence within and around Indian country deserves wider recognition. Trafficking in general, according to the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, is defined as “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person or services, through the use of force, fraud or coercion for the purposes of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage or slavery .” Sex trafficking differs from human trafficking as it is “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a person for the purposes of a commercial sex act, in which the commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such [] act [is] not [] 18 years of age .” 

 

If trafficking is left unchecked, human trafficking will continue to flourish, which is evident through the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls phenomenon . The Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls phenomenon (MMIW) speaks to bring and spread awareness of a “generations-long silent epidemic that has stolen the lives of Indigenous Women, Girls, and Two-Spirits across [North America].” There are a few reasons why the MMIW issue persists; however, extractive, male-dominated industries near Native communities are a large contributing factor.

 

The main issue is that tribal governments have very limited control over non-Indians because of complex jurisdictional issues among federal, state, and Tribal governments . Tribal police departments have to grapple with jurisdictional issues, along with underfunding and a lack of resources to combat increased crime rates stemming specifically from the presence of man camps. Therefore, the perpetrators skate by, allowing atrocities against Indigenous women and children to continue, with little to no recourse .  

 

In 1978, the Supreme Court in Oliphant held that tribes do not have the right to arrest and prosecute non-Indians who commit crimes within Indian country . “If the perpetrator is non-Indian and the victim an enrolled member, only a federally certified agent has that right. If the opposite is true, a tribal officer can make the arrest, but the case still goes to federal court .” This holding results in a stalemate, or “jurisdictional triangle,” as tribal governments are left wanting jurisdiction but have to hand over these cases to a U.S. attorney, which is further juggled between state and federal authorities . Cooley only adds to this jurisdictional triangle.

 

The primary issue given these circumstances, amongst other aspects, is that victims are left to stand and wait by while little to no accountability takes place. These murdered and missing women receive no justice and certainly do not gain any form of autonomy back from their trauma. Cooley, on its face, acts as a step forward towards tribal sovereignty. Yet, tribal officers are left in the same situations as before. The officers still must answer to outside law enforcement, leaving a trail of jurisdictional challenges and complexity. 

 

Attorney Mary Katherine Nagle, a citizen of the Cherokee Nation, frames the issue at hand quite well: “Recognizing that governments on the local ground should have the right to protect people in their communities without having to look to the federal government or an outside sovereign is a core conservative value .” 

 

One would think giving tribal governments criminal jurisdiction over non-Indian members would be the most logical line of action. The Supreme Court seems to disagree.

Skip to content