This is the twenty-fourth in our series, “The ABCs of the AJP.”

In 2020 alone, the United States suffered 22 separate extreme weather and climate-related disasters that each caused at least $1 billion in damages, for a total of more than $100 billion in losses.  That staggering statistic is not an anomaly, as climate change continues to result in more and more extreme weather events every year.  For example, the Texas freeze that rocked the state earlier this year and killed more than one hundred people, also shut down the state’s significant petrochemical industry, disrupting supply chains nationwide, and caused an estimated $80 billion to $130 billion in direct and indirect economic losses.  Hundreds of deaths are attributed to the unprecedented and record-breaking heat wave of the Pacific Northwest, and a British Columbia village where the highest temperature ever recorded in Canada was devastated by wildfire.  Taking into account these and other weather-related tragedies, the losses become inestimable on a human scale.
Continue Reading X-Treme Weather and the Need for Climate Resiliency

Electronic devices and their components marketed in the European Union and European Economic Area are subject to a morass of environmental and product safety requirements that is only likely to increase with the EU’s implementation of its Circular Economy Strategy in the near future.  The requirements apply to all types of equipment, from sophisticated information technology equipment, to military equipment, aircraft components, electronic medical devices, household electronics, consumer devices, and industrial tools.
Continue Reading Environmental and Safety Requirements Affecting the Marketing of Electronic Devices and their Components in the European Union and European Economic Area

On June 11, 2019, President Trump issued an Executive Order that would require the Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Food and Drug Administration—the three main agencies with regulatory authority over genetically-engineered (“GE”) plants and animals in the United States—to revise their regulations governing GE organisms.  These changes follow closely on the heels of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service’s (“APHIS”) recent proposed regulations that would increase the number of genetically-engineered organisms that may be produced without undergoing APHIS review, and are likely of interest to biotechnology companies, agricultural organizations, and other entities interested in GE organisms.
Continue Reading President Trump Issues Executive Order Directing Significant Changes to the Regulation of Genetically-Engineered Organisms

On June 6, 2019, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) proposed a significant restructuring of the agency’s regulations governing genetically-engineered organisms.  Public comments on the proposal are due by August 6, 2019.  APHIS’s proposed changes, which will increase the number of genetically-engineered organisms that may be produced without undergoing APHIS review, are likely to be of interest to biotechnology companies, agricultural organizations, and other entities interested in genetically-engineered organisms.

Continue Reading APHIS Proposes Sweeping Revisions to the Regulation of Genetically-Engineered Organisms

On September 23, the Dutch Government appealed a decision* of the District Court in The Hague that obliges the Dutch State to reduce its greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions by at least 25%, instead of the currently envisaged 17%, compared to 1990 levels.  The decision is unique in its kind in Europe: it forces a government to change its policies in pursuit of more ambitious climate change targets on the basis of the State’s “duty of care.”  The ruling comes at a time where NGOs in Europe are becoming increasingly active in pressuring governments to tighten environmental regulations.
Continue Reading Can Courts Oblige States to Increase Greenhouse Gas Emission Cuts? Urgenda vs. Dutch State