The impacts of climate change are being felt more strongly than ever, and politicians are ramping up efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions and “decarbonize” the U.S. economy. But as money, time, and interest accumulate in the name of these efforts, one of the largest obstacles to implementation happens to be the environmental laws on the books today.
In their paper “The Greens’ Dilemma: Building Tomorrow’s Climate Infrastructure Today,” J.B. Ruhl, David Daniels Allen Distinguished Chair in Law and Co-Director of the Energy, Environment and Land Use Program at Vanderbilt Law School, and James Salzman, Donald Bren Distinguished Professor of Environmental Law at UCLA School of Law, identify the roadblocks in current regulations that hinder the infrastructure development needed to achieve lofty environmental goals and offer a path to meeting the goals that various public and private entities have committed to in the near future.
“Climate changes everything,” the authors write. “We are suffering the impacts of climate change, and these will only get worse in the future. We need big changes to address the climate threat, and quickly.”
However, federal environmental statutes from the 1970s, along with state and local initiatives, created impediments to development that have a halting effect on all kinds of infrastructure, including “climate infrastructure” like solar arrays and clean energy transmission lines.
“It’s naïve to think that the legal tools used in the past to fight pipelines and power plants will be put aside simply because the new agenda is climate friendly,” the authors write. The paper cites a variety of opponents, from NIMBYs to environmental groups, who point out the disruption and damage that wind turbines, high-speed rail, and other green initiatives can cause.
The authors stress that these conflicts need to be recognized and addressed promptly. Ensuring a balance between rapid development of climate infrastructure and protections is critical.
In “The Greens’ Dilemma,” Ruhl and Salzman track the history of environmental law and regulation, highlight strategies designed to manage trade-offs between development and protection, and propose a “New Grand Bargain” – “a new environmental and siting regime designed for the scale and urgency of climate infrastructure.”
The authors are careful to note the paper is “not an ‘anti-environmentalist’ article,” citing their lifelong dedication to environmental protection.
“2050 may seem like the distant future, but the consequences of not getting those trade-offs right could be dire,” they write. “At the very least, the public conversation about how to manage the next twenty-five years should include an alternative to tweaking our way to net zero.”
“The Greens’ Dilemma: Building Tomorrow’s Climate Infrastructure Today” is published in the Emory Law Journal, Volume 73, Issue 1.
