Read more of this story »

Only 1.3% of imported food is inspected by the FDA, and of that small fraction, many hazardous items are confiscated. The average American consumes an estimated 260 pounds of imported food every year, which is roughly 13% of their diet. Food safety will always be a concern. Arming consumers with the knowledge of where their food comes from will not only help with everyday shopping, but also help in the case of a recall of a food from a specific region (like jalapeños from Mexico). While the new law has some benefits, many recent examples of food contamination and safety concerns show that it won’t do enough.

Read more of this story »

I was quite surprised to read earlier today, that among all of the possibilities, a neighborhood in Lima has taken a stand on the issue of noisy, barking, scurrying, dogs. Who would have thought that noise pollution caused by dogs would get a group of Lima citizens up in arms?

Without a doubt, the level of noise pollution in Lima is tremendously high. When combining the cacaphony of sounds that arise from traffic, parties, animals, and so on, you will be hard pressed to find Lima residents who at some point have not been annoyed by the constant tapping of their ear drums. For this reason, I think there is merit in passing a law that attempts to limit noise pollution in Lima. Whether or not targeting the population of dogs as a method to control noise is the right way to do it– I’m not sure.

Read more of this story »

Read more of this story »

Speakers at a water conference in San Francisco today discussed the relationship between development and water supplies. Or, more to the point, the lack of water and continued urban sprawl in much of California and other western states.

The talk given by Roger Moore and David Boyer entitled, “The Water Supply and Land Use Interface: Lessons from a Decade of Litigation under the UWMPA, CEQA, and SB 610/221″ was part of the 2008 California Water Law & Policy Conference organized by Argent Communications Group.

Moore and Boyer, both environmental lawyers, shared their perspectives on California’s Urban Water Management Planning Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, and Senate Bills 610 and 221–often called the “show me the water” laws.

Read more of this story »

Read more of this story »

What surprised me about this was not that a corn by-product was a natural herbicide and also acted as a fertilizer; I was surprised that our patent law system allowed a Iowa State University researcher to patent the use of corn gluten as a herbicide. I understand the basic policy behind patent law: to encourage people to expend their time and energy developing new products by rewarding them with exclusive rights to the fruits of their labors for a period of years. This makes sense to me and I think it is generally a good system in most cases, but sometimes it just seems to go to far.

Take corn gluten for example, this is a product that has probably been around for thousands of years. People have used it for a number of different uses, the primary use being feed for livestock. Sometime in 1985, a scientist at Iowa State University is claimed to have discovered that the product can also be used as a herbicide. Shortly thereafter he filed for, and obtained, a patent for the use of corn gluten as a herbicide.

So I’m a little bit torn about this. The lawyer in me says, “well, without the protection of the patent law system Dr. Corn Gluten and Iowa State wouldn’t have any incentive to discover new uses for products and it may have never happened.” The normal person in me thinks, “what the fu@%!, its corn meal mush! How can you patent that?!” I understand the policy from an intellectual standpoint but is seems that in some cases (like this one) it goes a bit too far.

The part about this that I think most concerns me is that I’m not sure if the patent system actually achieves its intended result. At least in this case (and the case of my relative) the fact that the patent exists will likely prevent him from producing and selling corn gluten. I am sure there are several other potential marketers of this product who will be deterred from bringing a environmentally friendly alternative to toxic herbicides to market because they do not have the capital to pay Iowa State licensing fees to sell it.

I guess I’m still not entirely certain about how I feel about this. I guess there is just some part of me that feels like ti is unfair to let someone of exclusive rights to any use of something as common as corn. From a legal prospective, I think the fundamental flaw in our patent law system is that it assumes that the patent holder will do a good job of bring the product to market or finding those who will. That doesn’t always happen and as a result we are deprived of use of a valuable product until the patent expires.

“Homeowners will have to use renewable energy sources to meet 14% of a household’s total energy consumption for heating and domestic hot water,” starting in 2009.

Image credit: Dave Yoder for The New York Times

Furthermore, the widespread state action on auto emissions could persuade the government to enact nationwide fuel efficiency laws, rather than leave a patchwork of state regulations for automakers to work around.

The Christian Science Monitor took a look at what’s happening across the U.S., and predicted some ramifications of the Vermont case:

• The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may be prompted to grant California a waiver from the Clean Air Act. This would allow California, along with Vermont and the 10 other states with identical laws, to begin enforcing emission requirements for cars sold in their states.

• Six additional states – Arizona, Florida, New Mexico, Utah, Illinois, and Minnesota – may proceed with their own emissions requirements. All together, the 18 states that have vehicle emission laws or that are exploring them make up about half the U.S. auto market.

• Congress may have to reconsider new fuel-efficiency standards it’s currently weighing (which are not as demanding as Vermont’s). Or they could mandate a tougher federal requirement (more of a long-shot, I’d say).

• Federal judges in two similar cases brought by the auto industry in California and Rhode Island could dismiss those cases if they determine the industry has had its day in court and further proceedings would be redundant.

Groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, and Environmental Defense were party to the Vermont lawsuit, and are optimistic that the judge’s ruling will spur other states to action. The auto industry promised to stricter regulations.

The 12 states with emissions laws already on the books could cut up to 100 million tons each year. Overall U.S. emissions from cars and light trucks total about 1.5 billion tons per year.

Christian Science Monitor
Cybercast News Service