Green Options » Best Of Bay Area Winner

Hawaii’s Superferry Deemed Unconstitutional, Put Out of Business

Amanda Peterka — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 03:33:20 +0000

The behemoth of transportation in Hawaii, the Superferry, is shutting its doors as of this week after the Supreme Court ruled that an act giving it permission to run without the proper environmental regulations was unconstitutional.

The ferry, a monster that could hold 866 people and 282 cars and that uses more fuel than a large plane, was kept running for a year even though it never had the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that’s required by the state of Hawaii.

Read more of this story »

Mining Waste OK To Be Put Into Watersheds?

Amanda Peterka — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:03:46 +0000

A lawyer for a mining company in Alaska argued today for the company to continue dumping deposits into a nearby lake, even though the deposits are killing off the local aquatic life. The logic behind the argument? The metal waste from the company can be defined as a “fill,” and after 10 years or so, the lake can be put back to normal and “restocked” with wildlife, according to the AP.

So…it’s OK for the mining company, Kensington, to keep killing wildlife because it can be replaced somewhere down the line? If everyone started arguing this way, it would be OK to continue putting too much waste in landfills and too much pollution into the air, because we could eventually stop doing it and clean up. Somehow that doesn’t seem like the right way to look at environmental protection.

Read more of this story »

US Supreme Court Sides With Navy In Whales Sonar Case

Andrew Williams — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:15:16 +0000

In a landmark case, the US Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the US Navy can carry out sonar training exercises off the southern California coast, without safeguards designed to protect whales, dolphins and other marine mammals.

The decision is a major setback for environmentalists, who had hoped the Court would uphold an earlier injunction by a federal judge requiring the navy to take precautions while undertaking submarine-hunting exercises. Environmental groups originally launched the lawsuit claiming that the use of sonar can injure or even kill a wide range of marine species, including sea-lions and endangered blue whales.

Read more of this story »

The U.S. Navy Doesn’t “Save the Whales”

Amanda Peterka — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:47:36 +0000

The U.S. Navy and the Bush Administration are taking on the almighty creatures of the ocean.

The Supreme Court today began hearing a case that questions who (or what creatures) get dibs on the ocean waters off the coast of California, according to the Christian Science Monitor.

Read more of this story »

Eco-Boutique Spotlight: Ladita in San Francisco

Stancie Wilson — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 07:01:34 +0000

Green boutiques are not lacking in the city by the bay and Christine Kay, owner of Ladita is quite aware. Winner of the Best Of The Bay Area award and recently featured in the September issue of Lucky mag, their mission is to offer the latest eco brands and limited-editions. They’re stocked with coveted labels like Del Forte denim, Toggery, Covet, Stewart+Brown and James Jeans amongst others. You’ll also find a selection of handmade and/or recycled jewelry and even eco-duds for baby.

Read more of this story »

EPA Enforcement of Clean Water Act Undermined Due To Questions About Supreme Court Decision

Nayelli Gonzalez — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 04:41:08 +0000

Earlier this week two members of Congress sent a letter citing “grave concerns” over the implementation of the Clean Water Act to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen L. Johnson.

In the July 7th letter to Johnson, chairmen Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) of the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee and James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.) of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee credit an internal EPA memo, which was given to them by activist group Greenpeace, for leading them to explore the EPA’s inadequate enforcement of the Clean Water Act.

The memorandum, which was sent on Mar. 4, 2008 from Granta Y. Nakayama, EPA’s Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, to Benjamin Grumbles, EPA’s Assistant Administrator for Water, points out the conflicting ideals of the 1972 Clean Water Act and the 2006 U.S. Supremem Court decision Rapanos v. United States.

While the Act protects wetlands from urban development for water conservation, the court ruling challenges water protection provisions and upholds individual’s rights to build over wetlands.

According to Nakayama’s memo, the fundamental discord between the federal law and Supreme Court decision has led to confusion about federal wetlands protections which has resulted in the agency’s “conscious decision not to pursue enforcement of 300 Clean Water Act violations because of the jurisdictional uncertainty.”

In a Washington Post article printed Tuesday, EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar responded to the congressional inquiry. “We will be reviewing the new request and will work with the chairmen to provide information on our enforcement program,” Shradar was quoted.

Part of a series of pivitol environmental laws passed in the 1970s, the Clean Water Act was a monumental step forward for the environmental movement and surface water protection in the United States. The recent Rapanos v. United States ruling, however, overturned earlier decisions that stopped two seperate developers from building on their wetland properties due to environmental regulations connected to the CWA.

In the end, the court ruled 5 to 4 in favor of development and left the CWA in limbo.

Photo: EPA