RSS 1.0Arizona Journal of Environmental Law & Policy, Volume 5, Issue 2 (2015)
ABOUT THIS COLLECTION
The Arizona Journal of Environmental Law & Policy (AJELP) is an interdisciplinary online publication that examines environmental issues from legal, scientific, economic, and public policy perspectives. This student-run journal publishes articles on a rolling basis with the intention of providing timely legal and policy updates of interest to the environmental community.
QUESTIONS?
Visit the Arizona Journal of Environmental Law & Policy website for more information.
Recent Submissions
-
The California Plastic Bag Ban: Where Do We Go From Here?On September 30, 2014, the Governor of California signed the nation’s first statewide ban on single-use bags, including plastic bags. Senate Bill (SB) 270, as of July 1, 2015, will prohibit stores that exceed a designated amount of revenue or retail floor space from providing free single-use bags to customers at the point of sale. The bill also sets the minimum price for reusable bags at ten cents ($.10) with certain limitations and exceptions. The debate over SB 270 was one of the biggest battles in California’s most recent legislative session. While a lot of people in and out of California were cheering for the passage of the bill, others, including plastic bag manufactures, environment activists and even legislators from both major political parties expressed their concerns about the possible negative effects of the ban. Both the goal of the legislation and the debate over SB 270 are really focusing on plastic bags even though SB 270 regulates “single-use” bags. The debate will continue across the country with pending legislations on plastic bag restrictions in other states and cities. This comment mainly discusses the possible environmental effects and economic effects of the plastic bag restrictions found in SB 270, and reveals why such a bag ban is a right move to reduce plastic waste without substantial side-effects.
-
Why We Should Protect Natural AreasWithin environmental philosophy there has been much effort to determine precisely why we should protect wilderness and other natural areas. There have been many theories and much controversy. Should natural areas be protected for the sake of recreation and other benefits these areas provide to humans, the anthropocentric approach? Many ethicists prefer the biocentric approach, according to which natural areas should be protected for the sake of benefits these areas provide not only to humans, but also to other species. In this paper, I argue that we should adopt a more pragmatic perspective. The American public is overwhelmingly in favor of preserving natural areas and native biodiversity. This has been shown in a number of opinion surveys. I argue that the proper foundation for natural area preservation in the U.S. is the deep affinity many Americans feel toward natural areas and other species. Simply put, Americans love nature. Our response to nature is primarily emotional rather than intellectual. As surveys show, citizens believe that natural areas should provide a wide variety of benefits, benefits to humans and also benefits to other species. This should be expected and encouraged in our pluralistic society. There are no incorrect reasons why we should protect natural areas. Environmental policymaking in the U.S. is especially problematic since we must accommodate, as well as possible, the various uses citizens wish to see provided by federally owned natural areas.
-
Indirect Vs. Direct Reuse: The Best System for ArizonaWater is a most precious resource sustaining life for every community on the globe. Water is the key to comfortable and sustainable future for the growing populations in Arizona’s desert cities. Population changes and limited ground and surface water resources, such as the Colorado River, are pushing Arizona to come up with new ideas to respond to the demand for a safe, clean, and reliable water supply. One possible solution to this problem is the reuse of water. The reuse of water in Arizona would help to provide a sustainable water supply that is able to meet the demand. Indirect reuse and direct reuse of wastewater for potable supply are two creative ways to ensure that there is enough water to sustain the increasing population in the desert climate. Although both methods are environmentally sound and provide water resources that are safe for the environment and the population, Arizona should implement a system of direct potable reuse of water. An explanation of the differences and similarities between the two systems will indicate that direct potable reuse of water is the best policy for Arizona.
-
Solar Shift: An Analysis of the Federal Income Tax Issues Associated With the Residential Value of Solar TariffIn the years since renewable energy technologies were deployed as an alternative eney source, solar eney continues to aid in reducing carbon dioxide emissions. To date, solar technologies are emerging as an increasingyl useful source of elecricit. Additionaly, solar technologies also provide signjcant benefits to the environment as well as various solar stakeholders across the nation. Of particular importance here, photovoltaic technologies (common'y known as 'olar panels" or 'olar sstems') are espeaialy useful to the residential solar sstem model. Although this residential modelprovides the aforementioned significant benefits, as solar stakeholders consider shifting from using the traditional net metering rate design to the newer value of solar tanjf ith the residential model, they must also consider the federal income tax consequences of such a shift. Thus, this paper examines the importance of the resident-utiit agreement's structure in assessing the feasibiiy of this shit. J
-
Lead Ammunition: Legislation Required or a Matter of Personal Responsibility?The Arizona Game and Fish Department has found the toxicity of lead-based ammunition to be the leading cause of death among California condors within Arizona. Condor exposure to lead has also been problematic in California and Utah. In response, on October 11, 2013, California Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 711 into law, making California the first state to fully ban the use of lead ammunition for hunting. This Comment begins by presenting an overview of the problem created by condor exposure to lead. It then discusses California’s attempt to remedy the problem through legislative action, and compares Arizona’s approach to the problem. Finally, the Comment considers whether Arizona should do more to protect the condors.
